Final Tribal Council

Survivor Final Vote Margins Over Time

The closest recorded final margin is 1 vote; the median across 50 recorded finals is 4.5. US Survivor data through Season 50.

1 Closest margin
4.5 Median margin
5 Unanimous finals
Winner’s vote margin by season
S1 1
S2 1
S3 3
S4 1
S5 1
S6 5
S7 5
S8 1
S9 3
S10 5
S11 5
S12 3
S13 1
S14 9
S15 2
S16 2
S17 1
S18 7
S19 5
S20 3
S21 1
S22 7
S23 3
S24 5
S25 5
S26 8
S27 6
S28 7
S29 3
S30 5
S31 10
S32 3
S33 10
S34 4
S35 3
S36 1
S37 4
S38 5
S39 6
S40 8
S41 6
S42 6
S43 6
S44 6
S45 2
S46 2
S47 6
S48 3
S49 3
S50 5

The deeper read

A close season and a competitive final are not the same thing

Only 9 recorded finals were decided by a one-vote margin, while 5 were unanimous. That means the end of Survivor is often more decisive than the edit’s suspense implies.

Vote margin is partly a format artifact: bigger juries create room for bigger raw margins. Winner share and era medians are better comparisons than treating a 7–1 result as inherently more dominant than a 4–0 result.

At a glance

How decisive are Survivor juries?

9 One-vote finishes

Across 50 recorded final votes.

5 Unanimous wins

Every recorded ballot went to the winner.

4.5 Median vote margin

Winner minus the next-highest finalist.

Raw margins should be read alongside jury size; winner share is the cleaner cross-season measure.

Typical final margin by era
Seasons 1–20 3
Seasons 21–40 5
Seasons 41+ 5.5

Median margin is less distorted by an unusually large jury or a single landslide.

What the numbers say

Key findings

  • Margin compares the winner with the next-highest finalist, not with all losing finalists combined.
  • Winner share makes different jury sizes easier to compare than raw vote totals alone.
  • Only votes represented in the jury-vote source are included; unusual finale mechanisms should be interpreted in their season context.

Full results

The underlying table

Download CSV
Complete data table for Survivor Final Vote Margins Over Time
SeasonWinnerWinner votesNext highestMarginWinner shareUnanimous
1 Richard Hatch 4 3 1 57.1% No
2 Tina Wesson 4 3 1 57.1% No
3 Ethan Zohn 5 2 3 71.4% No
4 Vecepia Towery 4 3 1 57.1% No
5 Brian Heidik 4 3 1 57.1% No
6 Jenna Morasca 6 1 5 85.7% No
7 Sandra Diaz-Twine 6 1 5 85.7% No
8 Amber Mariano 4 3 1 57.1% No
9 Chris Daugherty 5 2 3 71.4% No
10 Tom Westman 6 1 5 85.7% No
11 Danni Boatwright 6 1 5 85.7% No
12 Aras Baskauskas 5 2 3 71.4% No
13 Yul Kwon 5 4 1 55.6% No
14 Earl Cole 9 0 9 100% Yes
15 Todd Herzog 4 2 2 57.1% No
16 Parvati Shallow 5 3 2 62.5% No
17 Robert Crowley 4 3 1 57.1% No
18 J.T. Thomas 7 0 7 100% Yes
19 Natalie White 7 2 5 77.8% No
20 Sandra Diaz-Twine 6 3 3 66.7% No
21 Jud Birza 5 4 1 55.6% No
22 Rob Mariano 8 1 7 88.9% No
23 Sophie Clarke 6 3 3 66.7% No
24 Kim Spradlin-Wolfe 7 2 5 77.8% No
25 Denise Stapley 6 1 5 75% No
26 John Cochran 8 0 8 100% Yes
27 Tyson Apostol 7 1 6 87.5% No
28 Tony Vlachos 8 1 7 88.9% No
29 Natalie Anderson 5 2 3 62.5% No
30 Mike Holloway 6 1 5 75% No
31 Jeremy Collins 10 0 10 100% Yes
32 Michele Fitzgerald 5 2 3 71.4% No
33 Adam Klein 10 0 10 100% Yes
34 Sarah Lacina 7 3 4 70% No
35 Ben Driebergen 5 2 3 62.5% No
36 Wendell Holland 6 5 1 54.5% No
37 Nick Wilson 7 3 4 70% No
38 Chris Underwood 9 4 5 69.2% No
39 Tommy Sheehan 8 2 6 80% No
40 Tony Vlachos 12 4 8 75% No
41 Erika Casupanan 7 1 6 87.5% No
42 Maryanne Oketch 7 1 6 87.5% No
43 Mike Gabler 7 1 6 87.5% No
44 Yam Yam Arocho 7 1 6 87.5% No
45 Dee Valladares 5 3 2 62.5% No
46 Kenzie Petty 5 3 2 62.5% No
47 Rachel LaMont 7 1 6 87.5% No
48 Kyle Fraser 5 2 3 62.5% No
49 Savannah Louie 5 2 3 62.5% No
50 Aubry Bracco 8 3 5 72.7% No

Reproduce the result

Methodology and limitations

What we counted

We summed recorded jury ballots by finalist and season, sorted each final by votes received, and subtracted the runner-up total from the winner total.

Read this with care

Final formats and jury sizes vary. A large numerical margin in a large jury is not necessarily more dominant than a smaller unanimous result.

The generated CSV contains every row in the underlying table. See About the data for source provenance, update cadence, and corrections.