And what about those 3 votes? In the past Survivors have generally been awarded in the end for “playing the best game”. Not so much this time. Of course all three of them could be labeled “coat-tail riders” so maybe the question is moot. I don’t remember a single season of Survivor – except maybe for the first one – where so many arbitrary, minor actions had such a big impact: Charlie noticing the immunity idol and inciting the wrath of Ken, Randy and the cookie incident, Bob taking part in the humiliation of Randy – while almost costing him Randy’s vote – probably played a big part in Sugar’s last decision to vote for Matty and securing Bob’s win.

I’m just glad it’s over and we get a fresh start with hopefully better crop of Survivors in 2009.

Marcus is kind of an ass, too. I have no idea why he thinks that Susie’s decision to save herself invalidates her roles as mother and teacher. Ken did the same thing with Bob and his “broken word.” “You’re a bad person because you didn’t let me win.” I mean, do these people really believe that?

How shocked am I that aside from Bob the only one I think I could stand being around is Matty? I never would have thought so in the beginning, but he seemed like a genuinely nice guy.

Not that it would have helped her, but Susie should have definitely played up the fact that it was her vote for Marcus that changed the game.

I too was confused by Marcus, but he cleaned up nice.

I liked Charlie’s question for Bob.

Also, I thought Sugar was kind of ugh while she responded to that question. As if the paparazzi are following her every move. Spare us.