Board Thread:Survivor 22: San Marcos/@comment-24207263-20170208162752/@comment-27845097-20170209005326

Hey Austin, I hope you can make sure the entire jury reads this because I'm going to make a few differences between Nick and I's game right there that I didn't get to address in my speech.

Firstly, strategy. I feel like my strategic game is demonstrated through my awareness. I constantly planned one step ahead, which is why I was reluctant to fully trust Chris/Claudia because I knew they always had alterior motives, and were only looking to make 1 round deals. I feel as if I was charging most of the ideas that propelled us further. Although Nick had grown very annoyed with Nathaniel, I knew that taking that trio to final 6 would be a mistake and insisted on taking out Jenna. I felt the same with Renz, and although voting out Nathaniel would’ve been easily, I knew the timing was dangerous until we had a more secure position in the game without him. Although I tried to keep this in line with other people's plans, it was more in terms of being a realist instead of trying to make these crazy moves just to "show off" to the jury.

This ties into my second point, my social relationships. I genuinely connected with a lot of people throughout the season, and this translated into the game because I shaped my strategy around what others wanted, rather than trying to push my own agenda which would’ve ruined my whole UTR strategy. Also to clarify, by UTR, I don't mean I wasn't playing, it just means I was able to avoid being targeted due to many factors that I tried to control. I was adaptable to my surroundings, and in a season like this, where everyone had plans, I was sure to make it seem like I was down with whatever, while slipping my own agenda through.

Nick was also a social player, but I believe his 1-1 alliances had already existed through you Austin, or Nathaniel, so I felt like my relations with Jenna for example, were a bit more crucial for the both of us. I wouldn’t say I was some sort of dictator that controlled every single decision in the game, however I will take responsibility for having a better intuition of timing, and making moves that set me up to go further than I would have if I didn’t indirectly prevent some other moves that Nathaniel or Chris/Claudia or even Quetzal was pushing for. Renz' boot, for example, was the only time I can say I wasn't adaptable, but this risk paid off because it would eventually lead to a more flexible position moving forward, where the ball was in our court instead of Tacana's. There were many times where voting you, or Nathaniel out would've been an easier choice and believe me I would've done it, but I'd prefer if I were doing it instead of someone else, which is why I was so adamanent on voting out Renz, or trying to save you, etc.

Although I stayed loyal to Nick, this was because he was a solid number, and backstabbing him was never beneficial. I don't think he's played a bad game either, I just think in certain areas I was more actively engaged in the game, and had to relay a lot of that back to him at times. I love Nick, and I'd say above anything we were a partnership, which is tricky because the jury would find it hard to diassociate between us, but I believe my strongest points over him were being decisive and adaptable.

Also just adding this, I knew that Nick was closer to Chris/Claudia throughout. I kept that relationship in check by taking power away from Chris/Claudia, not giving them the ability to choose Nick over me. I knew if Nathaniel wasn't here, and Jenna was, that they would target me next, and taking out Jenna was a great example of me knowing my position in the game, and changing it!