RHAP: We Know Survivor - Breaking Down the Stats that Make a Survivor Winner

Episode Date: June 27, 2025

RHAP'S We Know Global Survivor host Shannon Guss talks to Kosta AKA "The Survivor Fact Checker" to compile what demographic and game data makes up a US Survivor winner. The pair look at extensive stats and spreadsheets around job, age and personality archetypes, we well as in-game voting, challenge and advantage records to change the way we both analyse and play the game.

No Frills delivers. Get groceries delivered to your door from No Frills with PC Express. Shop online and get $15 in PC Optimum Points on your first five orders. Shop now at nofrills.ca. Shop with Rakuten and you'll get it. What's it? It's the best deal, the highest cashback, the most savings on your shopping. So join Rakuten and start getting cash back

at Sephora, Uniqlo, Expedia, and other stores you love. You can even stack sales on top of cash back. Just start your shopping with Rakuten to save money at over 750 stores. Join for free at rakuten.ca or download the Rakuten app. That's R-A-K-U-T-e-n racutin dot c-a. One of the hardest parts of getting older is feeling like something's off in your body, but not knowing exactly what. It's not just aging. It's often your hormones, too. When they fall out of balance, everything feels off. But here's the good news.

This doesn't have to be the story of your next chapter. Hormone Harmony by Happy Mammoth is an herbal formula made with science-backed ingredients designed to fine-tune your hormones by balancing estrogen, testosterone, progesterone, and even stress hormones like cortisol. It helps with common issues such as hot flashes, poor sleep, low energy, bloating, and more. With over 40,000 reviews and a bottle sold every 24 seconds, the results speak for themselves. A survey found 86% of women lost weight, 77% saw an improved mood, and 100% felt like themselves again.

Start your next chapter feeling balanced and in control. For a limited time, get 15% off your entire first order at happymammoth.com with code NEXTCHAPTER at checkout. Visit happymammoth.com today and get your old self back naturally. 12 ordinary Australians. 16 New Zealanders. 7 million Australians. 1 million pounds. 1 million euros.

1 million chikolias. 1 million rubles. Tribal spoke. Tribal spoke. The adventure of a lifetime. The adventure of a lifetime. The adventure of a lifetime. Hello everyone and welcome to RJP's coverage of off-season Survivor content, general Survivor

content. I'm your host Shannon Guss here for a very exciting podcast that we've had in the works for a long time. We've been saying we're going to do this for many, maybe we've like waited for a time. I thought this like one month off-season between Survivor should be a wonderful time to do it. So I'm going to welcome in someone who some of you may know from his wonderful content online or to put on Instagram. He is Kosta, the Survivor fact checker. Kosta, thank you for being here. Thanks for having me, Shade.

And this is honestly like a dream come true. Playing Survivor would be the ultimate dream, but after that, this is like the next biggest dream is getting to chit chat about Survivor in detail with you. Oh, well, thank you. I mean, Costa is, my chat is here reminding me to be like, I've told Costa this before, like best person, because Survivor stats person,

which I think anyone listening to this hopefully is in the weeds enough where that's like awesome and great. If you don't think that's awesome and Survivor stats and working out like results based on those stats is awesome, you may be in the wrong place. Maybe stay around and find out. But also, Costa is like a cat foster dad. The best people alive. Those two things, like the Venn diagram of that being you, it's like it does not get

any better than that. I'm glad you think that. Yeah. During the pandemic, my wife and I had 15 foster kittens and four of them found homes elsewhere and the 15th one stayed with us. So we have two cats now. Yeah. That's wonderful. Well, I love it. I love the, that is, I mean, incredible. Let's talk about that for the next hour. Yeah. That's what people are here to hear about cats. Yeah. Cats and stats. You should definitely get like, you should definitely have

a shirt that says cats and stats. Next time. Great birthday present in the future. No, we're here to talk about survivor stats. And for those who aren't familiar with your work, I mean, I'd love to kind of get a sense of how you got to this point. Again, check out at Survivor Fact Checker on Instagram and on Twitter. There are great graphics that Costa does every week around so many different things. I mean, it's around like the stuff we all need on like confessional charts for Australia and for US,

for like edgy, you know, the pre-season winner predictions, what we've talked about, like not just confessional charts, but like then putting that into seeing the stats as they pertain to like the whole of survivor history. We're gonna talk about a lot of different things in a very impressive Google Doc. Today you do the draft stats as well,ain to the whole of Survivor history. We're going to talk about a lot of different things in a very impressive Google Doc. Today you do the draft stats as well, so many different things. Tell the people what you do and how you got to being the Survivor fact checker.

Jeff Tate Totally. So like, I've been watching Survivor since All Stars. That was the first season I watched live. I just kind of remember hearing from friends on the school bus in elementary school. I was like Jeff's target demographic, like a seven-year-old watching Survivor come a long way since then, but yeah, I started with All-Stars, got hooked pretty immediately, and I've been watching it ever since. Obviously some up and downs like everyone has,

but our GP has kept me invested through all the years, I'd say like the low points of Survivor. But as early as I'd say Guatemala, I was like writing down the boot order of the season on a whiteboard, because I didn't have like Excel on my computer at that time to keep the data in a more precise way. But it's always been a passion of mine collecting data

and from like writing the boot list on a whiteboard for season 11 to like running this Survivor Instagram account for Survivor, the whole new era basically I've had this Instagram account running with a multitude of stats, just like my ability to track stats, collect them, use them, put them in presentable manner, just like that skill has gotten much better over the years. So my goal is basically to take insights that I find interesting and make them interesting to people that only kind of care about stats. So make it digestible, it's really my goal.

And I think we see that stats are so important. Like again, if you're someone who does not think you're interested in this, but if you have an accident and are just checking it out and discovering if this is interesting to you, it's so important into like the matter of the game. I mean, like, especially in the new era, maybe less so for a first grade and survivor

where people are like, who did what now? But in the new era, I think especially people are so aware of the, like the lore. And like we see it, it happened where like there was what like, was it seven male winners in a row? And leave it like broad stats, like winner stats like that, where like, what was your gender? It's like pretty specific. But I think that then like people started saying, well, why are we doing this? And they started unpacking biases and it started kind of tending a different way in the way that it's like shifted in the new era.

Just from like a jury and caste perspective, like when you look at why have the gender trends really flipped in the new era compared to what they were before, there's no mechanism in the game that should make that happen. It's purely, I think, caste who saw those trends and don't want to be part of trends that might be based on like damaging biases or perceptions. And they just unpack that a little more to like tend them a different way. And that's just one example. I mean, I know that the stat I'm sure we'll talk about, which is always spoken about, is how rarely the winner of the season votes wrong with the merge. We can still win. Statistically, it's very unlikely. And I think it was Owen in 43 who said at the time when he

voted wrong, the merge is completely messed up. What is the merge vote in the new era? But like when he voted wrong, I think he was like, like, I don't think I can win anymore. You know, like he like had that stat in his mind as a super fan where he was like, this is going to be really difficult. So I think what we want to do today, we'll talk a little bit about like sass generally at the end of some of the confessional stuff that I think is really interesting. But the main thing we want to do is really think about the winner, like the winners of the especially the US and then we're going to maybe really think about the winner, like the winners of the, especially the US and then we're going to maybe in a different off season extrapolate out globally, but we can kind of talk about some differences. But the main thing is looking at a really big data set of 48

winning games, 46 winners, and what that looks like demographically and what it looks like in the game and are there any trends that speak to if this person is going to win? And I think it's a good thing if you're drafting preseason or if you're watching the game during the season to be like, this person's on a good path where statistically they're more likely to win or if you're in the game to be like, I'm done now, I'm out. I have to move myself out of winning probably. And I think that, yeah, there's a lot of value to that.

So I'm really excited about it. I am too. I think like the way that the data has gotten into the meta, I think back to like Angelina talking about how women rarely found idols back in the day, and that became like a very salient thing. So I just love when data gets put in the show. And I think I'm really excited to get into that with you today. Yeah. And then, you know, there's a lot to discuss around arguing about the reasons why that might happen and everything. And then that becomes the analysis of the show. But we have this amazing Google doc that I think you said you were going to make

available for the public. If anyone wants to kind of look at it after, because it's a bit of a, well, I don't know, people can see it. They can make the screen full screen. If you're listening and audio, um, this is all on YouTube as well. But of course we're going to talk through all of it. So yeah, do you want to start us off on kind of how we're starting here? I'm on the wrong slide.

Originally, I screwed up at the very first thing. Let's start here. We're starting at age here, the age of the winners. Let me know where you want me to go with this and the findings you found. We're going to start again, like in a very demographic standpoint, you can see probably some of the tabs, age, job, personality, um, like even like family and stuff, like we'll talk about that. And then getting through to some of the strategic elements of the tabs, age, job, personality, like even like family and stuff, like we'll talk about that and then getting through to some of the strategic elements of the game. But we're going to kind of try and build a profile of the statistical survival win.

I think that's kind of what we're trying to do. Yeah. So I think we're best to accommodate people both listening and watching. I'm honestly mostly a listener to podcasts, but I think it's really helpful here to have the spreadsheet in the video view. And as you said, yes, I love to share the spreadsheet so people can poke around with this after the fact and comment on it, send me questions, feedback, when I'm wrong, point that out and blast me on social media.

But yeah, this kind of spreadsheet is a good insight into what my brain looks like. Not that anyone needed to know that, but this is a little... That's amazing. I love that it's color coded. That's amazing. That's part of it too. I'm a huge fan of conditional formatting for Google Sheets, Excel Sheets. So yeah, this spreadsheet in most of these tabs will show every single winner.

There's 48 of them, so it's hard to fit on one monitor screen. But everyone's there. This tab is looking at everyone's age. So when you talk about precision, a lot of sites will just list the winner's age, but then the question is, is that their age today? Is that the age on day one of the cast? Is it the day that they won? And so because I care so much about precision,

I've included both the winner's age on the first day of filming and the last day of filming. So like day one, day 26, 39, 42. It fits for every single season. We know what the filming dates are. We know everyone's birthday. So this is getting- This is amazing.

You can see who had birthdays. Yeah, I believe Vesepia- Sandra won on her birthday? On her 29th birthday. Sandra, Michelle, Vesepia, I think all had birthdays on are very close to their season ending. That's amazing. Okay, but what are the findings?

Like, okay, so what, I mean, this is really good, I think for the drafts, which I need to be proven, but who should we be looking at? And then people get upset, I think, when you're like, they're too young, they're too old. It's like, okay, but in the pre-season, it's meant to be like fantasy football. We should be able to look at them on their merits.

And I do think the interviews that Mike does and everything and trying to find the sparkly people, I think that's important too, but it is interesting to think not just how old they are, but I think how old they are compared to their cast, like if that has any bearing, maybe it doesn't, but if it does, then I certainly want to tend to it in the way I look at people going into a season.

Yeah, and I think a lot of things about demographics, there's no absolutes. Like it's like someone that is the youngest can't win. Like, you know, Fabio is 21 and won the game. Marianne, I think might've been the youngest on her season when she won. Actually had that as a close. Zach was a swathy.

It was actually a very young season. That's right. Mary Ann was only the fourth youngest. Yeah. Jenna and Aris were the youngest. He just changed to be. Yeah. So and then Fabio, the second youngest, Sophie, the second youngest, Todd, third, JT, third. Well, that's interesting. JT was so young and Amber and Tommy said,

I did not know that Tommy was so young as well. I'm already learning things. I know we all know so much, but also so little. And they can sort of buy like oldest too. So Gabler, Gabler's the only person that was the oldest on his season, I guess. Oh wow. Bob Crowley is the oldest.

So at least that's where the fandom kind of knows like, oh, Bob is the oldest winner, but like he was not the oldest person on his season. So there's little nuances there that I try to accommodate almost everything on this spreadsheet as possible. So it's crazy to me. So Tony was the second oldest and winners of all, which is also, I think I wouldn't have thought that necessarily, given that he played

quite recently, I guess, compared to people who played like a while ago. But yeah, so I mean, compared to people who played like a while ago. But yeah, so I mean, were there any findings on this? Like you want to be this much the oldest on the cast? Or was it like, other than like, I guess like, okay, so fine. So if Gabe was the only and Gabe was winners, like a unicorn, and Gabe was like the only oldest winner. You don't really, you don't want to choose the oldest person on a tribe or in a car. Is that kind of the findings? Yes.

I think a lot of these tabs will have the raw data on the left. And then if you scroll to the right, it will show kind of like the findings might need to be talked about, talk them all through. You can go a little bit more, but it's just like the kind of breakdown. So how many people won in their 20s? How many people won like 2025? And it tallies all that up and also looks at like, how many times did the youngest person win the oldest person wins? You can see that summarized on the right here. Yeah. So, right. So the findings are that being your 20s and 30s, okay, this is this

is something we might know, but like 20s and 30s is the best. And it seems like if you're going to be choosing like draft picks who are at an extreme, it's better to go younger than older as well. And that would correlate to that. Yeah. And the last thing I'd like to do is like the age of the people also matters on how a survivor casts as well. So we're looking at these specific ages.

Like I have certain columns that show the entire cast of survivor and then how many winners have come from that age group. So you kind of see as a cohort, like the, it is like the 30, 35 year olds, depending on whether we're looking at age day one or end of the game is like 23 to 25% of those people win the game versus representing 18% of the overall cast. So I would say that's like a 30 to 35, 35 to 40 actually outperform their age a bit. And I'd have to like, again, there's so many nuances, all this data of like, some of these 35 to 40 year olds are on returning player seasons where that's like the only person there. But I think generally like,

30 to 35 is a great age to pick a winner. Right. Cause they're like overperforming quite a lot compared to how many of them are on the season compared to how often they win. Yeah. And so to clarify, like there are the most winners from the 25 to 30 age range, but that's also the most common. Yeah.

So they do outperform slightly, I think because older ages underperform so much, Yeah. So they do outperform slightly. I think because older ages underperform so much, but yeah, 25 to 40 is the key range with like 30, 35 outperforming the most from their baseline. Yeah, which probably speaks to things we could guess at, but now we have the proof where like, you know, kind of how old was like Kyle? Like, because Kyle was what and I'm in the 30-35 age range so I guess I should apply it quickly before aging out of my like best statistical time. This is a good one if you're roughly around this age go now. No but I think that that makes sense because you know it's approachable to everyone and it will seemingly like you might not you know people might respect you more than the younger people but then also like not like underestimate you as much as they do like the older people. It makes a lot of sense, but I think it's interesting as well because every cast is so different.

Like, you know, I think Charlie's the youngest of 50 and he's in his late twenties, which would usually be pretty good. It's like, it's an older cast of a lot of parents and stuff. And now it's like, well, the jury look at you the same way. You make the same kind of relationship. So like obviously cast, but you have to look at, yeah, um, compared to the rest of the cast. Right. And I think I love that survivor data is there's, there's so much in the spreadsheet,

we're just on the age data and there's already like three more analysis that I would do if I had infinite time, no job. Like I would compare the age of the winner compared to like the median age for their specific cast and see like how often is it like within a close band of the median of the cast versus being an outlier, but that's for another time. Yeah, so already we're gaining a lot. This is, we're starting with the obvious stuff maybe and going through, but I feel like the fact that it's here and people could pour over this for so long is so interesting. Is there anything else from this tab that you, we have the zodiac signs, is there anything there? I'm not necessarily, I don't know what any of these are. I'm looking at the Pisces because I'm a Pisces,

but I still don't really know. Yeah, I wouldn't. I'm also not an expert here. This is just like, I know some people love this, this stats. I'll just say for the people listening, we've had eight Capricorn winners and only one Sagittarius. We've, we've all 12 signs represented, but there's a clear most of Capricorn fewest with Sagittarius. Incredible. Well, let's move on. We have residents. This is more obviously American than. Well, it's American. So what a Canadian.

Yeah, there's a huge Canadian condition. That's always been the thing. What what do you what did you see? Was anything interesting about the locational winners? Yeah, not a lot too much here too because people like residents is even an odd one too. They could have just moved to a place, they could have been living with their whole life. So I don't put much stock in this, but just because we're going over so many stats, just a quick note. California has the most winners. That's pretty unsurprising because California has

the most people for the season. That's not unsurprising because California has the most people for the season. That's not surprising in the slightest. The things that stick out, we have multiple winners from Idaho, Iowa, and Ontario, Canada, when those are pretty small areas that have been represented. So if you're Canadian from Ontario, that's a good pick. Otherwise, there's not much to read in here, but just these are more like data snacks, not necessarily like things that make a great winner, I would say. I do find this really interesting.

I don't know enough about American geography to know, like it's like, okay, I like people from Idaho, like approachable type of, I don't know enough about Idaho, but seemingly, okay, if you're like 30 and from Idaho, like go apply. This is your time. So we're going to move on to job. And I do find this to be very interesting because obviously people think job is important.

That's why they lie about it all the time. And this is why I think guests will show, are there more threatening jobs? Should people be lying more often? Like what was the data that you found from profession? Was there anything here that tends to anything? So again, the status rev or something like very hard data, this is kind of a little bit softer data as a non-technical term, but like I try to categorize all these jobs into different broader categories because there's just not enough winners to have like clear data

and like, does a trial lawyer do well? Maybe we have pretty good data on that, but some jobs only had one person that have done them. But I think the things that I noticed, again, on the right, I have the number of winners by job category, plus every player that I could categorize. I was doing a work of categorizing every job, every survivor ever, which is a tough thing to do, but I was able to categorize about 80% of them. And so this is not 100% complete data, a rare thing for me to have a complete data set, but of the 80% of the all sort of jobs that I could categorize, a couple stuck out as being great and a couple that stuck out as not having any winners. So the three kind of

categories that stuck out to me as being very strong signs were people that owned their own business. So if you look at winners, like a bridal shop owner, that was Kim, Wendell was like a furniture company owner, Jam Jam, Kenzie, both ran their own salons. That's the kind of owning your own business is something that... I don't know, if you have to be very entrepreneurial to do that, that's not an easy thing to do. So I think if you can do that, Survivor is a breeze. That'd be kind of my spin. I'm trying to figure that one out.

Also to people in business or office jobs, white collar, generic business jobs also had a lot of success. Yeah, those are two areas that are really strong. kind of white collar, generic business jobs also had a lot of success. Yeah, those are two areas that really strong, also law enforcement, like we've had multiple firefighters, police officers, Tony, Sarah, Jeremy, Tom Westman, there's just like many people that have been in that line of work that have won as well. I think the one that it's talked about a ton

is like legal profession. Yeah. That one, there are three people that I categorize as being the legal field. We have like Cochrane, who is a lawyer. Kyle was a lawyer and we also we have there. Yes, I thought you were. Subconsciously redacting. Yeah. Yeah.

That's fascinating because everyone lies about being a lawyer. But to be fair, Wendell had a legal background as well and had then moved to being a like inter-furniture. True. And Carl only just won. So before that, there were two people who you could classify as like in the legal field had won. And yet it's so oversaturated in how people are lying about it.

I find that really interesting. People should be lying more about being like a cop and maybe the reasons they will be doing that. But then I think we like pick up anecdotally like on these bits of data, like definitely I think like obviously like after cops harassed and stuff, like we've started seeing that. I think we've definitely known the kind of,

you know, we've picked up on like the firefighter aspects, maybe not on winners, but like there's been a lot of... I mean, Todd has this in terms of flight attendance. But I think that that speaks to what you said, business owner. We saw with Kenzie and JamJam back to back, salon owners and I was definitely having worked in the hair industry. I'm like, oh, well, that's... It's very...

It's like you are entrepreneurial and probably creative and intelligent. And also, it's a service job. Like I think that that's what a business owner might have. Like even for a bridal shop owner, yes, you have to be smart too. And like, and that might be some of the white collar jobs, maybe like people just kind of use slow skills more. I don't really know how that translates, but you have to be like smart to kind of create a business, but then you also have to probably work with customers, you know, and that's

like a tough thing. So it kind of gets into those loaded professions at some level as well. And then you also kind of have that business. So I think that that makes a lot of sense. It's great when the data makes sense to what we see across the board, where people should probably lie more about that than necessarily being a lawyer.

Right. Yeah, so that's one too I love checking when I have time to go through and get every single job categorized to make sure we're not like causing any weird outliers here. But I also flung a couple job industries that have had no winners produced. Okay. That had a decent number of people.

Yeah. So this doesn't list the individuals in these categories, but it lists the jobs. So we've had 13 players that worked in finance, none of them have won. Okay. So the survivor is not looking. That's right. It's like kind of a smart me profession. Like that's not a person. That's like a perception of that job in general.

I work in marketing, which also not a love profession. So like I can throw stones at other professions, but that's one that I think is not necessarily loved. Technology. That's also when I work into. I work in digital marketing for a tech company. So I classify technology not as marketing so much, but if someone's an engineer or works in software,

like cybersecurity, AI, those would be people working in the technology field. And to me, those are some of the smartest people out there. But of the 22 that I categorized, none of them have won the game yet. What about podcasts have been terrible? I like the podcasting has been like terrible for. So that's not good. But it is interesting because I feel like Cody is like he seemed crazy.

He was he was going after Justine for being in sales and he was in sales. And I was like, no, he knew like he'd seen the stats and he knew that like it's not lawyers actually sales. And that's not exactly the same, obviously, as being a business owner. But I think speaks to what we're saying. If you're like in a businessy and servicey type thing combined, I think service more than anything is like, just like soft skill. Like just having to do people at their worst is probably translates to survivor. And then if you have that with like also a real business component, which probably shows like creative thinking and like problem solving and all of that.

I think that that makes sense. I love when the data makes sense. I'm loving this. Thank you so much. On behalf of all the listeners, thank you for all your work because this is really excited to get a first podcaster on the board. But the good thing is that in like what a couple of years

from now, probably everyone will be a podcaster. We had a bit of that in 47. They're really going to show up for the podcasters one day. Here we are on personality type. This is a bit soft as well, but tell us how you kind of found this because I find this fascinating as well. Yeah, so this one, I want to give a shout out broadly to Dan Ohm, who's this Australian guy that does amazing data collection. So I think I'm the most prolific like share of, of stats and stuff from survivor, but in terms of like having a database and also creating some cool graphics and keys, the most underrated and prolific data person as well. So we can like his data set as well, but some of the voting stats from my research came from him as as well as this personality trait breakdown.

So again, I have my own data as well, but I definitely use some of their data to complete this research. I want to make sure they get a shout out for that. So I don't know exactly where they got this personality data, but that's where I got the data. This is, yeah. So Maya's Briggs, which I find this is so interesting. So what did you find? And for people who don't know, it's like it's Maya Briggs so Maya's Briggs, which I find, this is so interesting. So what did you find? And for people who don't know, it's like, it's Maya Briggs or Maya's Briggs?

Maya's Briggs, I believe. Okay, right. I don't know that. I've done this once upon a time and I do not remember exactly what I got, but it's about extrovert, introvert. Yep. Sensing intuition. What's that?

Yeah, that one is like how you perceive information. So it's like, do you like concrete facts, you know, someone like me that's looking at the data or someone that kind of goes more on like abstract thinking. Okay. And then thinking feeling seems similar to that. Yeah. How do you make decisions like more thought thinking versus feeling? Yeah. And then judging, perceiving. What's that? I did this once. I'm far from an expert on this either, but I think like judging means that you're

the one that wants to like, like it brought a type A things of like you want structure, you want to plan it, you want to make all the decisions. The perceiving one is more like you're flexible, spontaneous, like want to keep your options open. That's the kind of loose versus hard structure. All right. And what did you find? Was any, did any of these tend to be extreme? Because personality, it seems like it must be very important to like how you win survival. So yeah, I split these into the four traits like that we went through just now. Two of them, it's basically like a 50-50 split between the winners. The cast of Survivor is pretty much 50-50 and the winners are 50-50.

So the Sensing Intuition one split, Thinking Feeling also pretty split. The other two were the ones that actually produced some insight. So if you scroll a little bit to the right, you can see that breakdown. Although to the right. I put the ones in green here. So Extrovert survivor does cast more extroverts and introverts. So I put that as a note, 57% of people are extroverted, which makes sense. I mean, I think if you're going to show, I would think you attend to

us by that. I'm shocked. It's that it's that similar. I'm like, why are the introverts going on survival from a strategic standpoint and from like a, why are you doing this to yourself standpoint? Like I am an extroverted introvert. So I'm even have more of the extraversion than other introverts. And that's one of the many reasons survivors my nightmare like what introvert would put themselves through the experience of being with people all the time, when you also have to be good at that, like, why would they

think that that would go well? And why would they do it to themselves? Like I recently want to do my deep dive with Asia, I think he said, like, I'm really fascinated by people. I like love people. And that's like my skill. I'm like, Oh, that's not me. You want to love people, I think, to be good and survivor. But this is this is fascinating to me. So 57% are experts. Again, I would assume it would be more just based on who's applying and who they want to ask as TV characters. That's interesting. And then they even overperform from that to win two thirds of the time. Exactly. Six, seven percent of the winners are extroverted. So that, again, that would kind of match my expectation. But just again, like you said, from the data is showing

that I would expect more. Like I'm actually like really impressed by the introverts like I feel like this was a good showing like I can't believe that a third of people winning are introverts like how did you do that? How do you do that for 26 to 39 days? Like I genuinely feel like 80. So I'm actually quite impressed by the introverts here and then judging and perceiving. So the structure people do worse. So this was all players 41% so more flexible people apply. And that makes sense because you have to like

take time off work and like, maybe like, maybe you'll get cut and it feels like that's probably all over the place. So in terms of just like surrendering to the situation, I can understand why more proceeding people apply. And then they slightly overperform 63% of people who win at to 15% who play the flexible types, who keep the options open win. And that also makes

sense. Like to have those skills. I think that's like literally one word outside of the personality test. Like just when people say what makes a good survivor winner, a lot of people said like ability to be flexible. So I think that is super key. Yeah. Okay. This is, this is very interesting. Again, like kind of what you would think, but you don't know why you think it. And then the data backs it up. Anything else on this? Uh, yeah, that's all I have for this one. Love that. All right.

We have siblings. Why did you think this was an interesting thing to look into? Yeah. So this one, a fan actually reached out to me probably three years ago, and I tried to find their name before this podcast, but could not find them. So this is something that someone came to me with this stat and said, every single winner except one has a sibling. And I kind of did some fact checking

to make sure that was the case. And I think it's generally true. There's only like six winners where I couldn't definitively find that they had a sibling or not. But of the like 40 some winners that I couldn't find data for only one of them does not have siblings. Which is Jenna Moraska. Jenna Moraska, right. She was like really, really close with her parents.

So do you have this compared to how many people in America, and I guess Canada have siblings? Yes. What I found was that 82% of people have siblings according to this data versus like 42 of the 43 on survivors. So again, anything you say, the winner is a small data set, but it does seem that having a sibling

might help you slightly to be a better player. That does make a lot of sense. Like living with people, I think it was like you had an enormous amount of siblings. I mean, I don't know enough about only children, but I guess the stereotype is you kind of need it more your way. I don't know, maybe just living with people all the time. More people, yeah, people your own age and not that they are in Survivor.

But yeah, I guess that makes sense that that would make you a better Survivor player. Yeah, definitely. And the personality thing, like if you're if you have siblings, you can't get away all the time. You have to be willing to like go along with things you don't like and endure that. So that's great preparation for being a survivor. Yeah, this is this is interesting. Discover the magic of Bet MGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck.

Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer host your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz, and more. Make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun and make same-day withdrawals if you win. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. Visit betmgm.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager, Ontario only.

Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. So now this is, we've done the demographic stats.

So let's just like, let's key in to what a winner looks like. This is where you should apply, right? If you are a 32 year old business owner with at least one sibling who is an extrovert and can be more adaptable, maybe from Idaho, who should apply to survival. You got this in the bag. The stats are all backing you. Or if that person comes up in 49, they're my first draft.

But we're not 32, 30 to 35. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So we, so that's, that's already a good, a good sense of that. Now we have some stats in the game. Is this anything? What's this? Is this starting tribe? What do we have? Okay. So we have here stuff on first immunity challenge. What else? What's interesting about the status set here? So again, I think there's data, like we're trying to find sets with the winner, but I can't help myself and like find little data tidbits as we go through it. So data tidbits I found was that we've had the most winners from yellow tribes. Buran from Africa was gold, but I will group that with the yellow in this case.

Otherwise, yellow has, yellow slash gold has 11, blue has 10, and then it goes on from there. So that's the tidbit. There's never been a winner from a Black tribe because they only had that once in the starting tribe. Kimberle? Yep. Yep. We've had some very random ones like brown is one for one, magenta one for one. But there's really, I don't take this as like, if you're on this color tribe, you're cursed. Although if you look at the green tribe, you're cursed. Although if you look

at the green tribe, the green tribe, besides the black tribe, which has is over one, the green tribe has been used 12 times and starting tribe only has three winners. So it kind of has a lower conversion rate from starting to finish. So maybe if you're on the beaches of Fiji, and you're on the green tribe, you might kick yourself a little bit and think the odds are slightly against you. But that's more of a non-statistical thought. That's more just like a cursed buff, maybe. Yeah. I would think that the only thing that would matter for buffs, I've always said this, is that I would think, and this is obviously wrong, I would think that maybe if there's any kind of, you know, effect here, it would be that the yellow buffs are just much worse to sleep with.

Like, it's not like you see a buff over my face every night. Oh, I take the blue. The yellow is like barely blocking out the sun. And actually it would be like being like under like a UV light, like I think that would be terrible. It's obviously not affecting them and like good for the yellow tribe people. Was there anything that you found in terms of winning or losing the first immunity challenge?

Because this is obviously something that's like a big part of like, especially modern survivor around of like disaster tribes and stuff like that. Did it correlate that like you should start winning early to win or is like the intentional massing maybe the way to go? Yeah this one it's kind of like one of those things where they're just it's inconclusive but I was on the beaches and I won the first challenge I feel a little bit better about my overall odds because of the 48 seasons uh uh, 28 times the, the first mini challenges won by the, the tribe that the winner was on. So 58% of the time versus 42%. The caveat there is that every season doesn't have two tribes. So it's not like compared to 50 50 there are like

more as more winners than half. So it's kind of a wash ultimately. Which is interesting. Yeah, yeah. Because I would think if you're out there and you lose, you're like, oh no, things are going so badly. It's like, no, you're actually like, as long as you don't get voted out tonight, you're actually fine. That's pretty much what it should be considering. In the new era, especially with these three tribe seasons, two thirds of people are going to win that first challenge and then otherwise just 50-50

and it like kind of equates to what you would think for that anyway. So it's actually the the the lesson there is I think like it's actually fine, which is not what you would necessarily think. Exactly. I feel better if I won the first challenge just because like you're safe that round and like maybe it's slightly better but but if you lose like you're you still have a path forward. If you lose you just start crafting that story. OK, like you already play those other people. They didn't have to play from day one like me. Right. Was there anything else on this or?

No, I think for the people look in this part, should I put some breakdowns like how many times do the tribe come in first place like versus winning? So the tribe that wanted me to the winner tribe got first place 44% of the time. So still pretty common, but that accounts for like three, four tribes that started a season. Right. Interesting. Okay. This is the merge vote. And this is the one we were talking about before. I mean, I'm just going to scroll down the spreadsheet. It is so unlikely. You can see three nos of people who were not on the right

side of the vote who won the game. It's so unlikely to win if you don't do the merge. But this is the stat that I mentioned at the top of the podcast where, yeah, it starts kind of like taking people out. Like the first thing about this is for people who are looking at the chart, Costa has done a wonderful job of putting if they voted for the boot versus if they were on the right side of the vote. Because one of my pet peeves in the data stuff is when people are like, oh, it was wrong because they voted wrong. Like, no, there are votes, but there are so there are thrown votes or there are so many reasons that people might not actually vote the person out of the game, but we're very

much in on it. And to be fair, there are also people who like vote correctly, but are not in on it. Like Mitch as an example, sorry, he didn't vote out charity. But there are examples of people who like, no, actually, no, if you, if you vote wrong, you're wrong. But if you vote, no, if you vote right, you're right. If you vote wrong, I got there. You might still be right.

I think that's what it is. So you're unlikely to vote right. Although to be fair, that did happen. 48 was so crazy. Let's say voted out Kevin and I think she thought Mary was going. So she actually did vote right by accident, but I wouldn't put that in the data set of her having voted correctly. So anyway, there is no meaning to anything. But I love that you have shown the people who actually were on the right side of the vote versus were on the right side of the vote versus not on the right side of the vote.

And yeah, the data on this is like so conclusive that if you vote wrong in the merge, like you were absolutely screwed. Yeah, this is one that I've definitely shared on Instagram. It's kind of like a seasonal favorite of just like when you get to the merge, share this one, cause it's so, so conclusive.

And some of these stats are just like, it's like leaning towards one direction, but like we can't really definitively say anything, but this one, I think the caveat, like it does seem like such a strong indicator. I think there's two, I have two thoughts on this. Like one, the merge vote often has like, it's more lopsided a lot of times.

So there are just gonna be more people that did vote correctly at the merge. That's like, that's a fact. But I think secondly, is that like the meta of Survivor has crept into the game. And so I think people will he mentioned, oh, and at the top of this podcast, like people that are very aware of this stat, I think there's many reasons why like, I don't think this is the only reason, but I think it's a reason why these murder votes in the new era becoming even more

consensus, like 10 to one votes, just because people really want to make sure on the right side of the vote. So it's like a past that impacting the future. Yeah, I mean, this is what we see in the new era that the purgatory vote for many different reasons becomes super lopsided people, especially with purgatory, like they want to be on the right side of the vote. they also want to survive, especially when half are vulnerable. Especially as we've talked about when you know that like a split tribal is coming up and you need these like mass numbers, like no one wants to be like, win on like a cool

six, five, and then you get swapped into a minority. Like people are trying to have these like, like a just surplus of numbers to make sure that you'll be okay. Next time if you were very afraid to make moves, it's like a complete failing in production. This whole middle part of the game, no one's talking enough about it. I'm talking about a lot of maybe a lot of people are talking about it actually, but the Murgatory into the Double Tribal, then into that, that like long challenge, where everyone gets screwed up for the day.

It just got strategy completely. And I do think that what's interesting, yeah, yeah, the interesting thing about it now, I think, is that a lot of people are voting correctly. Like pretty much everyone is a lot of the time. So that data is like, you know, you're not ruling anyone out. I guess like for the charity vote, it literally was just Mitch who actively voted incorrectly,

not in terms of the split. And that kind of ruled them out, you know, like that. And that was important. But I think as well, then you look at like the early seasons. A lot of the time it was these it was important differently because tribes would. Would win and then kind of run it down like winning that merge. Was actually right.

It's actually important battles. And then it would create that winning tribe that would become like the tagi, etc. But there are interesting things here because even like the Sepia votes our boss and Robyn that was like really her ally, but like people are jumping onto things. So I think it does show from the dawn of time, even if you're aware of the stats, there's quite a possibility that at the merge vote in particular, out of maybe like fear or change or like this big point in the game, people were very, very keen to start off the next phase of their game with the right name on the parchment or the right target for them.

I think that- Yeah, it's drawing the line in the sand. I think like, I think of the South Pacific one where Cochrane flipped, like that's like, Coach, like we're drawing a line in the sand. It really does like, that vote matters so much that I think some people wouldn't go to rocks at that point or like Cochrane wasn't willing to go to rocks

so he flipped, but it's like such a key vote to how the rest of the game plays out. Yeah, the three names we have here who actually weren't on the right side of the vote, Bob, Danny and Chris Doherty, which is interesting because they all won in the same type of way. They all won by losing in that line in the sand, but then surviving through. And they're all very much that same archetype that we would say of winner.

And that's how you win. So it is basically the takeaway is first, it's an interesting stat. It takes away of that, especially in the new era, people are going to pretty much mass vote, you probably will be on the right side of the vote. And if you aren't good luck, no, And if you aren't, good luck, no, but if you aren't, your way of winning, if you are the Owen who's like, shit, what are we doing now?

What it becomes is you win like a Danny or a Chris, where you survive and you'll have hopefully friends on the jury who, you know, who vote for you because you're like the last one remaining from that group. Yeah, and I think that there's, let's say in those three. I think like all of them won at least two individual immunity challenges. Danny won two, Chris and Bob both won three. So I think both of them like winning challenges became a necessity to their game in a way that not all winners need to win. So like they messed up on the merge vote, but they also won some clutch immunities and that

got them there. If they hadn't won those challenges, they would obviously would not have won the game. Yeah, and there would be as well things that are around like idols and stuff now as well in that archetype, which was like, this was pretty, you're like kind of on the cusp of that, but yeah, I think that idols and stuff, that's kind of, it starts, if you're one of the only people probably to have

a role at the merge, the game of the only people probably to emerge, the game of relationships is a little bit sunk. Like you better start winning challenges and finding some idols and making it more of like a trinket game. I think that that that is, yeah, fair for that. All right. So let's go to the next one. This is, as you said, immunity. This is interesting, because I don't think I've ever really thought about

how much immunity a winner tends to win. Obviously, there are people who've won a lot and then there are people who have won none. I'm really interested in what the findings are and interested in that. Yeah. So this one inspired me by seeing the thought that inspired this was like, does winning the first immunity challenge mark you as a threat and that puts you at risk getting voted out and then can't win? I think like, that was the very broad idea. And then I thought of like, oh,

Gabler won the first challenge and then like, talked about bringing his throw level down afterward. But like, that was the idea that inspired this and that kind of led me to not just looking at how many wins each person had, but like, at which phase of the game they won those challenges and trying to see if there's any data that was interesting there. Very cool. Yeah. So yeah, it's showing from each round, from final 13, depending on the season, all the way down to

the final three, if they had a final three challenge, the ones are showing wins and the zeros are losses. The black ones are where they're like, either it was like new where they split the tribe. So that person wasn't in that challenge or like Joe got medevac. It's a final three, but there's no. Yeah, there's a challenge with the medevac or something else happened. There's no challenge. So that's the data set. One interesting thing I thought about this was in the first 40 seasons, only four players, winners won the first 40 seasons, only four players, winners won the first immunity challenge, individual immunity challenge post-merge,

and then went on to win. So the four out of 40 won the first challenge and won. But then in the new era, we have eight winners and four of them have won the first immunity challenge and went on to win. So that's where I think my idea of like making a third at the start winning that first challenge doesn't seem to be an issue in the new era in the same way. It's like Gabler, D, Kenzie, Kyle all won the first challenge of the season, the individual new challenge post-merge and hung on and won the season.

That's very interesting. I'm trying to work out how to explain the stats of that. I mean, I'm quite surprised that it was so few in the first 40 seasons. That really shows that that was more of like a mark, obviously, than anything positive in terms of winning those immunities. I would say maybe in the new era, I mean, I remember it was like D, it was the split group, right? And she was like, I won for us. And they might be like, yeah.

So that was a toe challenge. Was that it? I think so. So yeah, I mean, it's possible in the new era because possibly the idea of the merge and the first challenges is now maybe not as definitive as it used to be. Like we won that challenge, but there would have been Murgatory before then. So there's like Murgatory and like no one's an individual winner. And then you just kind of start winning challenges.

Often you both win in these like split groups and you're like doing it for your group. Which Kyle obviously like, and Kyle's like a kind of a different thing because they were all so strong and like it actually made him like more valuable in this like strength alliance. But it's hard because you know, eight seasons is not like a huge data set. But I do think because it's so much more represented that is incredibly interesting. Yeah, so that was that was like kind of an interesting finding that I had just kind of the generic stats of the 48 winners, 12 never won individual moody in the season that they won. So 25% never win a challenge. As the numbers kind of dwindled,

the winners start winning more often. That's kind of just naturally going to happen. There's fewer competitors, higher chance anyway, but I think they also just not only do they have a higher chance, they win more than just whatever the baseline expected random number would be as well. So, yeah, I mean, that's very interesting because even last night I was chatting to friends who don't know a lot about survivor and they're like, how important is physicality like, oh, there are winners who don't win at all. And now I know exactly 25%. So we know firstly, if you had played before, we would have been like, don't

win that first challenge, but now like maybe you can actually, that's fine. don't win that first challenge. Like that would be terrible. But now like maybe you can actually, that's fine. Um, but is there like a median win number? So yes, the average is 1.8. So just under two, um, not sure the median is, but that'd be the average. Probably. Which also makes a lot of sense.

I think it's like not so much that you're getting it voted out, but not like, but like you might need one, you know, but you might need one or two. So that makes a lot of sense as well. Exactly. And 23% of winners won the last two immunity challenges. I think that's kind of like a clutch thing. Fabio, I think won the last two, the aforementioned Mr. Wilson won the last two,

I think, where they kind of- Fabio won three. Three in a row, yeah. These people just had these runs at the end. Fabio won four. Three in a row, yeah. These people just like had these runs at the end. Fabio won four? Three in a row, the final three. Yeah. But I think that's like a like the number counts for the winners kind of get racked up because

some of these people need to win at the end and they do win and so by winning they choose the numbers a bit. Yeah, JT has that as well. He won. by winning, they choose the numbers a bit. Yeah, JT has that as well. He won, obviously Tom kind of changes a bit of the data there because he won so many. Yeah, so we kind of feel like even with the new era stats, when a couple of challenges late, it's kind of the strategy,

they're not the strategy, but the formula. Yeah, I think at that point, like if you're a threat, it's already known. Like I think if you're a final six and you win a challenge, no one's going to be like, oh my God, you're all of a sudden a bigger threat than you were. Like even Camilla, I guess was already seen as a threat, which you won pretty near the end of 48. So yeah, I think personally, I used to think that it was a really bad idea to win the first challenge or even the first couple.

But from this data, it says like, eh, maybe if you're the archetype that people expect to win these challenges and you win, that makes you a target. But if you just win a challenge early on, it's like, whatever, it's just one challenge, not going to change anything. I do think, I think it's a lack of fanfare about it being the first challenge because often Murgatory is the first challenge. I think that's probably it. I still probably think you don of fanfare about it being the first challenge, because often, Murgatory is the first challenge. I think that's probably it.

I still probably think you don't want to win it. Like, the stats are still, what, 8 or 48. It is weird, but I still think that the new era, the data is so small that those could all be kind of circumstantial. Like, Carl's definitely is. Gabler is so hard to model anything off of. Like, Gabler's not been made a threat out of that just because of the type of person he is.

And I know that there are all these like aspects that you can put in any data set, but like just looking at like four of eight, I don't know that I'm necessarily like, oh, definitely do it. I think I'm still like, wow, it turns out a lot of people who win early don't want to win. And I think that there's that stat as well, because we're looking at winners, not losers, right? So we should be looking.

But there is that stat about the people who win a lot in a row, like the Frannies and Ricards and like they don't end to survive long after winning a couple in a row and I'm butchering the stat. I can hear Josh Kettles tweeting at me right now or blue sky into me right now about what I'm doing wrong with this. But I know that the stat is like definitely winning a lot early is not the way to go. Thank you. One, right.

There's a win two. I think Charlie was able to make it to the end, but pretty much if you're not Charlie and you win to buy a certain point, you're, you're going to get voted out for being a threat like Tony won a lot in the middle, but Tony in like winners was playing, I think pretty much the best game of all time. Um, other than that, you can see that there's like a hell of a lot of loss. Yeah. Like for the winners

early on. So definitely don't be like racking up wins early. Or if you're in the position where you need to be, like the game is maybe beyond you at that point. It's a bad sign. Like you want to just have to win the last two or three only. The last thing here, I had 42% of winners win the final immunity challenge. And that can be with three or four people. So I think

it's definitely higher than average. Like higher than random, I always say, like, you know, if it's exactly one in three or one in four, based on the season, I would see like 25 or 33% of people winning that final challenge. But the winners more often than that, 42% of the time are winning the final immunity challenge. That's really interesting too. I don't know that I necessarily would have like thought that like sight unseen. I think possibly, I mean, obviously something to add to the resume, maybe it's something again, like you might need it thinking like, you know,

maybe like for example, who like, you know, gets through with security and then already kind of like goes in running downhill. But then that also changes based on that used to be the case, but now you have the resume point of fire. So losing most of the time puts you into fire. And then that's like, it's a whole different challenge.

So- Yeah, you can win a different challenge. What I really am impressed by is your pursuit of like good stats in the face of survivor being like, I'm going to change everything all the time. I think that data is the most difficult thing possible to try and like make consistent. So-

They make it really hard. I think we're about to get into voting stats, which I think are the most complicated and ones that have to be caveated the most ways, but thank you. I really try to make the data comparable across different seasons. Cause like when it comes to the challenges,

there's final three, final fours. There's seasons that merge at nine, seasons that merge at 13. And how do you compare those things? Usually it just means you have to look at the analysis in multiple ways. If like first immunity challenge or one by this point in the game, there's so many ways to caveat it. But my goal is to try to make it digestible, look at it in as many ways as possible and try to get something interesting from it. Yeah, I think it's relevant. I mean, we're not saying like, again, like nothing even like there are, there are like, there's data outside of like, any stats, really, you know, that well, not that that makes sense as a sentence. But you know what I'm saying? Like anyone can do like,

even though before Gable, the oldest person had never won, like then he did, you know, so all of that can be true. You're never out. Still three winners have voted wrong at the merge, but like big trends. And I do think this is a really interesting one for me. Like someone winning a lot early is apparently really not the way to go. And I don't know that I knew that before today or had really thought about it. So I think that it's interesting to kind of get these broad patterns that people then again can break. But okay. Voting record.

This is, this is where I live. This is my favorite thing. What do we get from this? Is it for anyone who's not looking at this or wants to look at the, um, the spreadsheet after the podcasts, like this is great for its costs and then how many times it's voted for the boot, how accurately they voted percentage wise. And then there's a category I don't understand. Yeah, I was going to say, I felt to them by tiering them of like people that are really

on top of it below average, just in my own little scratch work there. So this one, the caveat I have to do before we get into this, this one, they're like, when it comes to voting, when there's a tie vote, like the person votes for the tie the first time, but not the second time, where they go vote right the first time and second time, how do you count that?

And so again, I originally counted where they had to vote for the person correctly in the tie to start. So they voted for like, like Erica voted for Liana at a vote and then switch it to Shan. So in this view here, it's showing her as voting incorrectly at that point. And I think some people agree with that, some people disagree with that. So I started adding in, were they right for at a revote and crediting that there. So that's slightly incomplete. And I've hit

those rows for the moment. But when this podcast is released, I should have that in there as well to look at like based on your own personal philosophy, does voting on a split and searching vote count as a correct vote or not? That's up to you to decide. But caveat forward, get into this. This is, I mean, look, this is so interesting because I think I would say without looking at the data, I think that voting correctly is very important. I think that that, to me, shows that control over the game and leads to winning games. Am I right? Is there anything here? Yeah, so this one, I think it's interesting, like in the earlier seasons, a lot of winners

had like a hundred percent perfect voting record. That's become a much rarer thing. I think with like, idols can throw that off or just having more chaos post-merge can throw that off as well. But I think that the thing remains that voting correctly is very important. And again, if I was doing more analysis on this,

I'd like to compare with like, how often does every person vote? Because usually more than half of a tribe is voting correctly, but not everyone's voting correctly. The average for all this is 83% of the time. So I'd love to see across people that make the merge or other breakdowns of what's the average. But again, we reset that key point again, that 83% of winners are voting correctly 83% of the time. That's the key thing that we can go from there into nuances.

That's very interesting. I mean, as you said, it used to be a lot easier to vote, not easier to vote correctly, but the votes used to be less complex. You know, like now we have to already like be looking at the data in terms of split votes. And now you have like, you know, some things in notes where it's like jam jam strategically voted for. You know, like there are extra votes there. There are there are lots of votes. There are so many lots of votes, which makes the data so hard.

There is there's a shot in the dark that hit in terms of like the rebates. There are idols, as you said, that can like negate. And then it becomes like, how do you so like the Kelly Wentworth vote? Are the people who voted with Kelly correct? Because she stayed, but like they weren't in the majority. So looking at that, I think has made things a lot more complex. But if you're taking like some pretty broad data, like 83% of the time, you need to go directly.

But then again, you're going to have those people who are the underdog type winners who didn't necessarily vote correctly at the merge, who might have like a lower vote count, but then have that pathway to win. But it's just like more like one type of way to win compared to control. Exactly. And I think there's like one little thing I'll add here. Like first eight seasons,

the average correctly voting percentage was 91%. And then it's 83% across the whole franchise. I think we also had about eight perfect games in the first 20 seasons, perfect voting records, and then only three since then. So just kind of putting a few numbers behind the things you're kind of saying broadly. Yeah. The perfect games are crazy. Like Kyle, again, like in a two-week festival season, I think that maybe speaks to how we all felt about 48.

Like all the love to Kyle, congratulations. But that is not how the new winner, the new year has been for winners. D at 44%. This one, this one blew my mind. I checked this out like multiple times. I'm like, this has to be wrong. But I think a few things are going on with this one. So one of them is like the J Maya Caleb shot in the dark moment. That one is incorrect vote there. She famously throws that vote on Sifu when Sean goes home. So that's kind of like, does that really matter?

He had a pretty messy early game. Yeah, some of these votes are not very, like those that that's two already that are inconsequential. And if we change that, she'd be up to three quarters, which is still a little below average. It's still the lowest of the new year. Yeah. Crazy. They also like the Julie,

the Julie Idol play was also one where she voted for Julie and then Emily. Oh, well that also, to be fair, okay. To be fair, now bring, okay, that was like her best move. Yeah, exactly. So that's one of these, this caveat comes in of like, I think on a broad level, these are really important, but I think when you kind of dig in, it can get a little bit like just these little percentage doesn't really convey how great of a game she played.

To be fair, like she would be bringing the 83% average at least slightly down and it feels like all of those votes are like pretty explainable. Like I'm looking now at her actual wrong votes. She still the Bruce vote, but she voted for Jake. That must have been a split. What? I don't know the Bruce vote. No, did she vote wrong for Jake? For when was that she not she was she not part of that?

No, we were voting for for Bruce. So she must have been. Oh, no, sorry, we're behind. She voted for Jake drew voted for Jake. OK, I don't know if it was a split or not. I can only apologize. I will look it up immediately. So possibly that was wrong.

I can't remember that vote. The Emily vote that she's in on that one, the exactly. And then the final five, that's the one people always point to. I even think like she was defensively well insulated, but yeah, that's not in terms of like voting. And that one is legitimate. She did not vote correctly on that vote. She voted for Keturah who did not vote.

So that's really interesting. Who else here is really interesting? The perfect games. I mean, the fact that Tony had a perfect game in Windows of War is crazy to me. And Tony again, the last perfect game before Tony was Tony. Yeah, talk about that. That is, that is incredible.

Okay, so we know that like people are voting, if you're not voting correctly, close to like 90% of the time, things are getting tough. It's a bad sign. Yeah. So interesting. Other perfect games, Amber, you want to think about that? Her and Rob obviously like tearing things up.

Natalie White. She has the highest amount of correct votes of any winner. Is that right? Yeah. She went to Samoa, Fofo, went to so many travel councils that she had many opportunities in choosing the power structure to get that done.

Wow. Okay. I'm sorry. If you, if you learn anything from this podcast, the fun fact of that stat of who this is that the most amount of correct votes or the most amount if you're at a hundred percent? I think that's it's both. She has, she's tied for most attempts and has the most correct. Okay.

I feel like I felt bad about the Jake vote, not knowing that, but now I'm coming back on, if you learn a fact today, Natalie white voted out as of a winner, voted out the most people correctly. Put some credit on Natalie white's name. Yeah. She was doing it like Russell obviously, but Russell didn't win as a winner. Natalie white did that. Honestly, ask a hundred survivor fans to give you that answer.

How would you rate Natalie White? That's an amazing stat. Love that. That's incredible. Is there anything else? Yeah, this is, I mean, you could spend a whole podcast just doing this, I think, just voting stats. Exactly.

And I think I'd want to compare how did the voting stats among the finalists, was that factored in each season? Did the person that voted correctly the most win? Try to figure out every single split vote. Did that count or not? I think that's the additional analysis I'd love to do. But from a broad level, voting correctly is important with all the caveats we spoke to

earlier. Yeah, we have Jeremy at 63%. But again, there's so many. There was the idle stuff and he lost Steven like Cambodia is a complex season. I think when I'm looking at the stats in terms of like we looked at who's really good, Natalie White, we're looking at who's on the lower end of this and we've already explained away a lot for Dee who is with all of that by far the lowest but we know is not. So then if you if you if you look at the lowest Bob 55% pretty low, Fabio, really low.

And then it starts getting up to Jeremy. But again, we're starting to get into some pretty complex seasons, like Cochrane against the three amigos. Michelle was left out of some pretty key votes. But even then, they're getting up to two thirds of the time they're correct. If you're losing over and over, and I think we see this a lot with people who continuously lose out on the vote. I really hate to... This is like a dunking on Owen podcast, but like

in the aforementioned- Love you, Owen. Yeah, love Owen. He's like the person who so much cares about this. And that's, and this is actually what we've spoken about a lot with the aforementioned, Jake O'Kane with Owen, the sentient goats who are very much out there like winners do not lose out on the vote this much. Like winners do not need to win immunity this much. Like winners don't, you know, are not on the wrong side of the merge vote, but now I'm in it and I'm aware that I'm like, part of the stat sheet and like, I don't know, I need to become an anomaly

now. Like, that's where I need to be and it's a very tough place to be. Yeah, now some of the new errors like playing Sphere 51, it's gonna be like, all right, Costa, the Sphere fact checkers, and be typing my name in a spreadsheet in six months when I'm back and I don't want to, I don't want my name to have a zero on the voted correctly column. Yeah, I don't want to be in like, I don't want to be at the extreme of that, but also then it proves that it's possible and it changes the whole data set. So that literally makes you a game changer. So don't lose hope, but also it's looking really poor. Yeah, that's fascinating. But okay, so that's where we're at with that. And then do we have more votes received?

Oh, and idols, okay. Two very interesting categories. This is great. Please just walk me through it because there's so much going on on the votes received tab. Yes, this one also it's kind of like, this is a basic answer of like

how many people never got votes. I think that's like one that you want to know, right, run off the bat. So 11 of 48 winners never received a vote. That's crazy. This is like, again, I have to caveat again, because in my world, if the idol, you negate votes with an idol, those account as votes.

Right. Some people do count those. So I think that's 11 people never saw their name ever. And then people that never saw their name ever. And then people that never saw their name or negated them, that number is 15. So a little bit higher. Huge. I don't think people would think that. Like, obviously, they've not been voted out except for one person. Yeah, but still, you would think that they would get like like they also have made it to the end. So think about how many tribal councils they've had to go to. That is huge to me. That's very

surprising to me. Really? Besides Michelle, who went to like six tribal councils, like usually winners are going to like a 10ish tribal councils, maybe like, yeah, about 10 tribal councils, I would say on average. Yeah. What's interesting about this, I'm like, okay, I'm trying to like create like the archetype in my mind of what a winner looks like, but I'm getting to like, don't be voted for and call the votes. Like, we solve the survivor.

Good night, everybody. Don't get voted out. You're a win survivor. That is, that's, I mean, that's massive. But like, do not see votes at all. I'm really, really shocked by that. Who were the people who were receiving a lot of votes? That's massive. But like, do not see votes at all. I'm really, really shocked by that. Who were the people who were receiving a lot of votes?

Yeah, so again, your trivia question, depending on how you count the votes, if you're going based on people that saw their name written down the most American. This one's a little easier than Natalie White. Yeah, Ben indicated nine of the 11 votes. But I think the one that I think is interesting is Ares had nine votes.

None of those were negated. So in my world, like actual votes, Ares is the standalone winner having received nine votes is the most. Was it just like Terry over and over and over again? Yes. Call the ambulance. Yeah. Chris Underwood obviously was voted out of the game. So they don't be voted out. Boston Rob from the enemy you would think would be getting a lot of votes that have to be like looking at these and then yeah. And then it starts getting

to like, people have very few votes. Like even the people who have votes are six or fewer over again. You were saying like an average of say like 10 tribal councils. So that's not a lot of words really. No. And so the part that I found really interesting, this is where like my analysis came in. If you go to the right, slightly I looked at when these votes were cast, like did they, when did the person receive their first vote? Did they get their first vote? Like on the original tribe, on a swap tribe, the merge, and also like,

at what, what tribal number as well. So on this. This that I found was that 23% of winners, only 23% of winners get any vote pre-emerge. That's that's the first that fascinating to me. Wow, people know if it's over for them so quickly, you should be giving up way, way quicker than they are. That's crazy to me. Twenty three percent of all women.

So I mean, to be a net, but now the pre-merge is like, most people aren't even going to tribal games. So that's again throwing off the data because the survivor loves to be tricky. But yeah, that's very, very interesting to me. That- So I was thinking back to the thing you were saying about

like, if you're losing that first challenge or second challenge, like, should you be worried? I think if you're the person like getting the one vote from the person leaving the game, then I think you could be worried that your kind of name is coming up soon. But if you're losing, you're in the majority in a small tribe, like the new air game post-merge is so up in the air, you can still be fine. But if you're seeing your name written down pre-merge, that's definitely like, this, this is not not good. Yeah. We saw survivor. Don't be a target. Yeah. I mean, but to be fair, while that might

seem obvious, that is so much more extreme than I would think. Exactly. The fun of this research, it was a lot of time to get all this together. But I think part of it's like, oh, this affirms things that we already know. Or like, this is kind of obvious. But in this case, it was like something that I really had a curiosity to know. And this led me to figure it out. OK. I've looked it up and Bruce, I think that was that was a vote split. OK, because he had an idol, right?

I don't remember this. This was so there's no, no, it's my brain. OK, it was a split. So these stats are like I've just as for these voting correctly. So we like working correctly like one time. Okay. But this is this is so interesting. Is there anything else here on like receiving votes? Yeah. So I think I think to below the. I guess the pre-merge, 23% of winners get the pre-merge, then 54 get their first vote post-merge.

But if you look at the post-merge votes, again, this is in the left side of this column, a lot of those votes come very late in the game. So, I can sort it by like tribal numbers. So, a lot of these come in like day, high 30s. Yeah, yeah, that's right. Okay. I have a very large screen. Here it is for the days, right?

So the first vote that people get, there is some people in the red, the people who are not doing on the data, who are early, but like there's a big jump between Jam Jam and Denise at 13. And to be fair, like Denise was really fighting for her life, but and then it like jumps up to 21. I mean, that's very late in the game, especially. Yeah. And again, too. If I do this again, I would say like adjust the first day

based on the number of days in the season so we can compare fairly across. We have Marianne here at 14. Right. Which is which is merge versus that would be. Oh, right. That's what it is. But that it's adjusting for the length of the season, which is it. But then, so, and that makes sense as well, because people, there are only few options to vote for, like the later on that we get. But like, okay, we're really solving a lot.

Do not be a target early, because that's very unlikely to win. Exactly. So last sat here, I looked at like tribal numbers. This is not tribal that the winner attended, but tribals on the season overall. So most winners at the 10th tribal council, that's when half of winners have received a vote. Like most winners have not received a single vote

before the 10th tribal council. Crazy. Well, they're so good at the game. That's why they're winning. We've really learned a lot, but that's crazy because it's crazy. Well, they're so good at the game. That's why they're winning. We've really learned a lot. But that's crazy because it's extreme. I think that if you were to ask most people, maybe I'm just wrong, but I think if you were to ask most people, they would say the winner's like, yeah, like probably don't get votes,

but like can get votes. I don't think they would think to this extreme of not getting votes or delaying votes to that extreme. Right. And again, another follow up would be like, how many votes did how many different tribals did they get votes? Like, that would be another thing to see. Like, did they just get one tribal council?

They got five votes or is it just like one over time? But yeah, getting votes is bad. Even if it's not voting you out. You heard it here first. Don't get voted out of survival. And here is idols. Yes, so this one, idols get a little bit tricky

because someone might find an idol, they pass it to someone, there's kind of a nuance. This is an impossible thought, is this? Yeah, this one is tough. So also like if you get an idol, sometimes someone gets up and says, "'Jeff, I'm playing this for Shannon'

and they play it on Shannon. Other times, someone's gonna say, "'Shannon, you could have my idol to play for yourself' and then you yourself play the idol. So I think in my mind, I see those as different, but not everyone sees us as different. So like Wendell, I think got up and gave the idol to Laurel. So like I think a lot of people say Wendell played that idol. And I think you should get credit for that. But from a stats standpoint, I think I see some nuance in like handing it to Laurel because maybe like that player doesn't have to play it for themselves. They could say, they don't have to use it. They can hold it or play it a different time. I think it's the last time to play it doesn't

really apply, but there's like a moment of decision making there. So a little bit tricky. That's my own little nuanced idol opinion. But I think the takeaway here is that a lot of winners find idols. And I think for a period of Survivor, almost every winner had found an idol. I think the new era, it's been less key. I think there's also been fewer idols in some sense to find in the new era. It would be a start to have some fewer idols. Yeah. But yeah, I think if you look at like the late 20s through the 30s, that was like peak idol fever where you had like Tony finding multiple idols, Tyson and multiple idols,

Ben obviously. So many people had multiple idols and that was key to their winning game. So again, this doesn't show people that found idols and didn't win, like Russell found a bunch of idols, didn't win. Ty had a bunch of idols, didn't win. But I think the stat is that of the eligible winners, since there was no idols before Guatemala, I think 58% of winners found an idol or had possession of an idol at some point. 58%. Yeah, it's an interesting kind of of because this is what we're trying to do. We're trying to like make the profile of a winner, right? Of this like 32 year old business owner from Idaho who has siblings.

And I think that what is interesting, to be fair, like, yes, find idols have advantages. It's interesting, though, because it because they're not the mold of the winner who needs idols to survive because they're the underdog, like the Kelly Webber type who was negating. They're not getting a lot of votes, they're controlling the votes and they also have the advantages. No one of these people want, this is incredible.

But this you would think necessarily wouldn't be as high, the way the challenge was aren't as high because that isn't more of an underdog thing. You might not necessarily need that as much, but yet it is more represented in terms of actually having idols. Yeah, I think it's like so much leverage. I think also like if you have the idol, it gives you more ability to make bold moves or to back yourself a bit because you have this

this safety net in a way that people are idle are maybe more afraid or just unwilling to make a move because if it doesn't work, they're exposed and gone. Yeah, you also might think, okay, well, there's fewer idols out there. Like I have this one. Yes, knowledge is power, like in the literal sense. Yeah. So I think that, so that's interesting

because I think it, yeah, as you said, it's more about the knowledge, the control and the confidence than the way we think about idols and the power of having an idol, which is you're in the gate votes. Like you'll be on the bottom and you'll save yourself, but you'll very rarely go on to win because that's not really the archetype of a winner.

The archetype of a winner is someone who is protecting idols from other people. Absolutely. And using it quite offensively and just using it to control more than defend. Right. And I think, I think too, that's the thing where like we watch Survivor as mostly omniscient viewers or we know where the idols are, but as a player you have no idea how many idols there are, who has them, and if someone tells you, is that even true, can you trust them?

So even if you've been told where the idols are, you might not even be confident that it's there. So I think yes, what you said, if they have it, that's the knowledge and that's powerful beyond just the power of negating votes. Yeah, and we see, obviously, Tony had a lot of idols, Ben, they're blowing out some of the getting votes. Yeah, and we see like, obviously, like Tony had a lot of idols, Ben, they're like, you know, blowing out some of the stats. But, you know, it's an important part of a lot of winning games

seeing here, like Maryanne, Rachel, Gable wouldn't have survived early without it, but there's kind of a different thing. Jeremy, big part of his game as well. So like, we know it's part of those stories, but again, like a lot of those players are controlling the game. Yeah, is anything else here?

No, I think IELTS are great. Don't need one to win. But I think if you have one, again, don't get in your head too much and think like I found an idol, I'm gonna win the game now, but more so like, hey, this does give me a little bit of an edge when it comes

to making strategy moves or knowing the landscape of the whole game. Yeah. Okay. Let's build the profile of the winner. So we've had the archetype, then from a game perspective, okay, if you lose the first challenge, you're okay. But you want to vote correctly at the merge and you want to vote correctly most of the time. You want to rarely get votes and definitely not early. You want to have idols, but again, not to negate votes because you're voting correctly. What are you negating? Just to control and to have that confidence.

You don't need to be winning as many challenges as you think. And definitely I would not be winning them early, maybe the first, but not a bunch early. And if you need to win challenges, it should only be a couple late. And that's it. That's the profile. That's it. I be a couple late. And that's it. That's the profile. That's it. I think that we found a lot of interesting stuff.

Is there anything else from, from the spreadsheet that I didn't look at? It's, it's a wonderful spreadsheet. Seriously. Thank you on behalf of everyone, because this is so interesting to me. I don't think it's, yeah, at least the second most popular spreadsheet on Twitter in the coming month. That's a great joke. Um, all right. Well, I wanted to also talk also talk about, you know, for maybe the people who don't know your work as much,

we wanted to build the winner profile and stats. But you have so many interesting stats. We spoke about this a little bit before. Like the confessional stats. And I think that this is why stats are so important. You do some great, like, comparison and confessional stats also for winners that also pass it out by gender and from a diversity perspective. And I think what's so interesting about this is as well, Jeff said, was it this year? This year? Yeah. He was like, you know,

I really don't want to wrongly paraphrase him, but it was like something about how like men are bigger characters on the show, maybe. And I think the stats have shown that the men get way more confessionals and maybe that's a casting thing, but maybe it's like, oh, but you're not giving people kind of enough like screen time in terms of that, especially when you see some of the female winners who don't get as many confessionals. And there's like a really big disparity in that. So there are things like

that that I find really interesting. Are there any stats that you'd love to talk through beyond kind of like the winner stats of it all that you think are really interesting that is like, this is why it's worth checking out? Yes. Yes. Many reasons to check out StarFact Checker. This is one where like a lot of my work just feels like it's for fun. It's very silly. Like the importance isn't really that big. Like it's fun if you're a fan of Survivor. This is one where I feel like the societal impact of my work can be a little more interesting and impactful.

So I think I was really inspired after Erika won the game. And like some people were saying she was a, no one that we know, but you know, people out there in the world were saying she was not a deserving winner. Like that really like hurt me deeply to my core that just seems so untrue that she wasn't a great winner. So I wanted to kind of look into the stats and say like, how does her edit on the show because she was known as being very purple. We didn't know who she was when the season started.

This has been a long, we barely knew who she was until she had that big hourglass moment. They basically went through and created a metric to define the fairness of the edit. So again, there's... You can calculate this in a million ways, but it basically made an edit metric that looks at how many confessions there are each episode, how many people are in that episode, and if you distribute those evenly amongst all the people, how many they should get, and then project that out for the whole season. So like really simple math, like 20 person cast, the premier has 20 confessionals, everyone should get one confessional.

So if you have more than one, you're over-edited, fewer than one, you're under-edited. That's like the basic metric. And then I use that to rank every single survivor winner. And this is the data output. So I think this was me kind of putting data behind a feeling that I think most super fans know that like women on survivor under edited, especially with like, I just say winners, email winners are under edited, male winners are over edited.

That's just like a known thing. But this is my effort to try to make that into like an actual statistic that people could look at and analyze and criticize. But yeah, this is a big passion of mine. So I think the thing we see here on the chart is that the 12 biggest edits of all 48 winners are all men. Top 12 are all men. 19 of the top 21 also men. And then you look at the bottom nine, nine of them, Bob Crowley is the only man in the bottom nine. So it's a pretty damning list to see it like this, because again, I came with intention

to like prove this, but the data was not like manipulated. This is like the pure data. I think the only thing about this data that you could cripple with is like seasons with edge of extinction. People on the edge can get confessionals, but they don't get as many because they're on the edge generally. So I think like Tony might be slightly inflated on winners of war,

but that's like a tiny caveat on this whole thing. But yeah, basically this is showing that men that win the show get way more confessionals relative to their peers in the season and are seen as like quote unquote more deserving winners. And my kind of theory behind that is that when you see someone on TV a bunch like they gain credibility, whether they're actually saying anything like important or not, you see them a lot and that seeing their face in their perspective makes them seem more credible. So that's why Jeff

and I think some fans, not people that we know, but people out there will say that like, you know, all these men are more entertaining, the best winners, but they're, not people that we know, but people out there will say that like, you know, all these men are more entertaining, the best winners, but they're also the people that we see on our screens way more than others, than women. This is so interesting and I think really important. And I think as well, like when you see stats like this that are so extreme, you have to look up and listen. Like, again, there are anomalies of things where

if it's like at 60% or 70%, you know, but like when it is this extreme, you have to pay attention to it. So people might say men are more entertaining than women. Firstly, secondly, that's so easily refuted by looking at the women who are under edited here. Look at poverty, look at standard twice. Like, these are two of the biggest characters, not players, yes, players, but differently, like characters in surviving history. And they're so under edited compared to some of them. And we don't see as much as like great characters without naming names. So I think we're like, you know, in terms of definitely like in terms of like who's more entertaining, I'm not even going to entertain that ironically,

but in terms of like how they cast, possibly there's something there and there are issues there. And I kind of spoke about this when Jeff said it earlier this year, in terms of like the reason they cast women compared to men, like what kind of person they wanted them to be in that season. But like, yeah, I mean, to be fair, they probably cast poverty to be a bikini babe. And then she ended up being like so entertaining and she was still under edited. So I think that you can look at it like, is it a casting thing? Like, no, when you look at some of these characters who are under edited still, like from a pure

entertainment perspective, it should be diverse and, you know, could be men or women from the passing. I do think it could tend to with the casting men to be the big characters from the get go. But then you do have these like really entertaining women who are so under-edited. So the stats on pure editing really seem to speak for themselves. Totally. Like again, there's so many of these summer stats that are like nuance and like there's, you know, we're leaning one direction, but this one to me is like so clear that there's a pattern of men being way over-edited and women being under-edited. That's so interesting. Well, are there any other staff that are like

particularly interesting to you or that? Because then again, like follow Survivor Fact Checker on Instagram slash Twitter slash BlueSky. Yeah, BlueSky and Twitter, I'm on, I'm Rob's Fact Checker. Rob's Fact Checker, that's where it started. Right here on RHAP. I mean, there's so much good stuff.

There's stuff around, again, like, edgy. There's popularity polls, which I think the players don't love to see. I always feel bad. I don't vote in the popularity polls because I'm like, I'm just going to vote everyone good because I just feel sad. But like, it does speak to public consensus. Is there anything else you want people to like check out or know about yourself? Yeah, I think think I think the polls are for me like the most fun. It's not just popularity polls like we vote on the season or like predictions for the week. So I think it's just a fun way to collect data and share it.

I think for me, having a platform like speaking about confessional stats is is one thing that feels like I'm glad I can have an audience to hear that projected further. But I think for me personally, like we're having these thousands of followers that vote in these polls, just kind of like ask a question about Survivor and instantly get back feedback. Like these people that follow me are the most voracious voters. I can put up like 20 polls and people vote in every single one of them. Like 90% of people that start that 20 poll session will finish all 20,

which is wild to be the people. I love that you have so dedicated. Yeah. Internal stats too. That was very, very on brand. But like, I think that, yeah, we see how important this stuff is. Of course, like when looking at everything we've always seen, like from like the diversity initiative and everything about that stats back up trends that often are

damaging that we have to look at and reassess. So stats are super important. And yeah, in terms of like analyzing the game, definitely in terms of analyzing the game and seeing how people, again, some of it feels intuitive, but some of it is more extreme than you think, or maybe not as bad as you think. And I think that that's what's so interesting.

And then, yeah, in terms of playing the game, certainly about at least knowing if you should apply to 32 year olds in Idaho right now, but also how you should play. Should you be lying about being a lawyer? But then again, perception is reality. If people don't like it, you can't just be like, actually, statistically, lawyers are not as bad. Yeah. But it is interesting about unpacking those perceptions that maybe don't necessarily add up. And then definitely, yeah, like knowing where you're at. Like if you're someone who is, we've seen this a lot, you voted incorrectly a lot, needed to win challenges a lot and been left out of the vote, no advantages, like things are looking dire. But I think it's interesting that yeah, we saw that. We need to send the editors that Natalie White voted correctly more than any

other winner and is what the most under edited. She's the most under edited by like a insane amount and she also has the best voting record of any winner. So like, you know, that are two stats that I don't like that they don't drive their complete opposite. Yeah. And it shouldn't be. What was it? 19 confessionals I think that she had. So is it, I just had it up as well. It is, yeah.

Oh wait, no, 15 confessionals. She voted correctly 14 times. She saw one more confessional than her correct vote. This is like the chizzy points versus confessional stats. Like she almost as a winner voted more people out than she had confessionals, which is bonkers. It was wild how much, especially in the most recent Australia's pilot season, because the gameplay most of the time was kind of all over the place.

So chizzy points were kind of flying everywhere. Like people would get zero confessionals and be like, it seems like everybody was doing stuff, we're not giving you points. So also the edit of that season is all over the place. So people were getting more chizzy points and they even had confessionals. Kaylyn was a big one in that. And actually, I think that one was validated where it was like, I think you are actually doing well. We're not seeing it, but like I'm going to give you a chizzy points than they even had confessionals. Kaylyn was a big one in that. And actually, I think that one was validated where it was like, I think you are actually doing well.

We're not seeing it, but I'm going to give you a chizzy point. But yeah, Natalie White, not just on chizzy points, on confessionals, VB voting correctly. Wow. That disparity is crazy. I love this. I hope everyone has enjoyed this even a fraction as much as I have. Because we put in so much work much as I have. Same.

Because you put in so much work because I loved it. Wonderful. That was so great. I feel like I learned so much. Thanks for having me on. Yeah. And I would say to people listening to like go in the spreadsheet, send me a message, tell me what I missed, tell me what you'd like to see too, because like I get a lot

of requests and I can't do everything. But if I get 10 requests, I'll get like the two that intrigued me the most and I'll actually go make a post about it or do a follow up about it. So if there's some stat that I totally missed, then I'm truly willing to do a follow up and find it out. So much work. This is actually incredible.

I mean, there are a lot of people who are not interested in this. I'm gonna lie to you. But for the people that are, like this is very much our people. I think as well, like when I came to you, what I actually said, I didn't mean for you to do this extreme amount of work. What I actually said was like, are there like a few interesting stats for winners?

Like are there, you know, like we say the merge vote or like, you know, and you were like, what about every single facet of them as a person and a player? Like, can I interest you in that? And I just think that's amazing. And I definitely would love in another off season to make this more global. Like, obviously, we're starting to start to set and there's much more data for obviously, you are a survivor than any other like individual franchise. And globally, the games are so different.

But I'd love to kind of pass this out globally, especially like after AV World, we'll get more data and stuff like that. I think that that would be really interesting. I mean, the confessional stats on AU alone are like crazy. So, and obviously, I mean, AU is so long. So in terms of like, I don't know. I mean, without the stats to back it up, I wonder if you can afford to not have as comprehensive a game as players and winners seem to have in the US where like, you can fall behind

a little more than like at least have time to like catch up. Like it feels like in US survivor, even as a 39 day game, like people were having to kind of run downhill, but strength of I was so long. I do wonder if you know, if, if you can kind of have some hiccups and then come back a little bit more, but it would be interesting to look at all of that for essay. I know that you watch everything, right? So one day we're going to do, we'll do a sequel. And while. We'll do everything. I've always wanted to say this to you in person. I've never actually spoken until this podcast, Weed Message and all that before, but I just want to thank you and Mike as well for getting me introduced to the world of international and global survivor.

Before the pandemic, I'd seen Russell Hans appear on AU and I watched Highland of Secrets. I think you and Mike were podcasting about that and got me to watch that as it aired. But I very much like dabbled in National Survivor and was like, I don't wanna get into it because if I do, like you saw my spreadsheet for this, I'm just gonna have to collect the data and get really into it.

So I kind of held off. So while the world was like watching US Survivor during the pandemic, doing every watch there, I watched like one US Survivor season over the pandemic and instead watched every AU season, every SA season, the New Zealand season, like everything's out there for International Survivor. And that was my like comfort for those two years,

whatever that we were locked down. So thank you for introducing me to that. It's been really fun to watch those shows, know those people and also like hear your coverage of all those seasons. Well, it's our game. We get to do that. So I think this is amazing.

We've started off here, and the possibilities are endless. I definitely want a follow-up. Hopefully everyone enjoyed this a lot, and this is my off-season content, where I just came in and just listened to your great stats. It couldn't be easier as well for me. These are rarity. Usually I listen to one last thing, too.

When I listen to Australian Survivor podcasts, or podcasts or watching the show, sometimes I disassociate when I'm watching the strategy because I just like can't handle the amount of hours of Australian Survivor and the strategy talk. And I'm literally in my mind like, it's okay if I don't follow this perfectly because Shannon's going to break it down on the podcast. Like I can just give that part of my brain to you. So it's a nice change of pace for like me to give insight to you because you give so much insight to me from, especially Lostra and Survivor strategy coverage. Thank you. That's

incredibly kind. I really appreciate it. Yeah. I mean, look, I was, I was like, what do you want me to prepare? I'm like, I looked at the stats, obviously not enough at like Myers Briggs before this. But you really, I'm like, you give me the findings and we'll kind of just chat about and I loved it. So really glad that we were able to put this together. Yeah, I've got pre-feeds and stuff coming up, I think probably like second week of July, I'm going to be doing one podcast per player. Like an expert to kind of introduce people or to kind of cover how we think each player will do.

I actually have already done one. I will give you a little bit of a hint. Nice one. So we will be first with Taryn Armstrong, who is my Saree expert. And we're going to be doing multiple podcasts. Yeah, 14 podcasts for all of the players to get to a premiere date that we don't have. But I'm like estimating like in August, and hopefully it's not earlier because then we don't have time. And if it's later, then we'll have a big lag.

So guessing something like that, hopefully every second day with those podcasts. Follow me at Shannon Gates, we know GlobalSurvivor.com so that you don't miss any of that. Costa, again, we've had a survivor check fact checker at Rob's fact checker. We've talked about that. But yeah, people should just be checking out what you're doing. It's great. It's so good. This is amazing. Please follow us through the message too. Like I, it's only a busy and can't respond to everything,

but I generally try to respond to every message because I get a good number, but not like an insane number. So say hi and what you liked, didn't like, and we'll hash it out. Don't say what you didn't like. Don't do that. Totally loved. This was great. Yeah. This was amazing.

This was so much work put into it. I really feel like we got a lot of really interesting insights.. This was so much work put into it. I really feel like we got a lot of really interesting insights. I learned a lot and I really enjoyed it. So thank you so, so much for being here. And I saw the cats in the background. So I was just like, this is my, this is my happy place. This is the best it can and my cat has been meowing the whole time. It's been wonderful. Cats and stats. That's, that's it. That's the brand. Those are our people. Thank you so much for being those people, for listening.

Thank you to our team behind the scenes. Thank you so much, Pasta. This was amazing. And I will see you guys next time. Bye. Bye. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe.

Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe.

Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. Survivor is safe. 21 South African 12 ordinary Australians 16 New Zealanders 20 million 20 million 1 million pounds 1 million euros

1 million shkalyans 1 million rubles Tri-Baspain Tri-Baspain Tri-Baspain Tri-Baspain