Survivor record holders
Highest Performance Above Expected (PAE)
By: Jeff Pitman | Last updated: May 21, 2020

Highest PAE (performance above expected) - Adam Klein, Millennials vs. Gen X

 

Adam Klein

S33: Millennials vs. Gen X

+75.5%

 

See also:

PBE - Performance Below Expected

Highest PAE (performance above expected)
Rank Contestant Season PAE NoJ SNoJ JVF ExJ
1 Adam Klein, Millennials vs. Gen X Adam Klein Millennials vs. Gen X 75.5% 3.86 15.73 10 2.5
2 Earl Cole, Fiji Earl Cole Fiji 64.8% 6.16 17.52 9 3.2
3 Jeremy Collins, Cambodia Jeremy Collins Cambodia 57.1% 6.09 14.19 10 4.3
4 Denise Stapley, Philippines Denise Stapley Philippines 54.2% 3.85 18.52 6 1.7
5 Natalie White, Samoa Natalie White Samoa 53.8% 3.48 14.51 7 2.2
6 Tommy Sheehan, IotI Tommy Sheehan Island of the Idols 53.1% 5.00 17.15 8 2.9
7 Tyson Apostol, Blood vs. Water Tyson Apostol Blood vs. Water 51.0% 6.73 18.45 7 2.9
8 John Cochran, Caramoan John Cochran Caramoan 45.2% 9.70 17.71 8 4.4
9 Chris Underwood, EoE Chris Underwood Edge of Extinction 45.0% 4.63 19.14 9 3.1
10 Tony Vlachos, Cagayan Tony Vlachos Cagayan 44.2% 5.40 12.08 8 4.0
11 Boston Rob Mariano, Redemption Island Boston Rob Mariano Redemption Island 43.5% 7.23 15.91 8 4.1
12 J.T. Thomas, Tocantins J.T. Thomas Tocantins 42.5% 11.11 19.30 7 4.0
13 Sandra Diaz-Twine, HvV Sandra Diaz-Twine Heroes vs. Villains 38.0% 4.89 17.05 6 2.6
14 Todd Herzog, China Todd Herzog China 37.7% 4.44 22.83 4 1.4
15 Sophie Clarke, South Pacific Sophie Clarke South Pacific 37.3% 6.18 21.01 6 2.6
16 Sarah Lacina, Game Changers Sarah Lacina Game Changers 37.1% 7.06 21.47 7 3.3
17 Jenna Morasca, S6, S8 Jenna Morasca The Amazon 33.1% 7.99 15.18 6 3.7
18 Ben Driebergen, HvHvH Ben Driebergen Heroes v. Healers v. Hustlers 32.9% 5.41 18.30 5 2.6
19 Kim Spradlin, One World Kim Spradlin One World 32.0% 9.68 21.16 7 4.1
20 Danni Boatwright, Guatemala Danni Boatwright Guatemala 30.6% 8.01 14.55 6 3.9
21 Yul Kwon, Cook Islands Yul Kwon Cook Islands 30.6% 5.61 22.52 5 2.2
22 Amber Brkich, All-Stars Amber Brkich All Stars 26.2% 5.67 18.34 4 2.2
23 Richard Hatch, Borneo Richard Hatch Borneo 25.8% 4.42 14.10 4 2.2
24 Aras Baskauskas, Panama-Exile Island Aras Baskauskas Panama 25.2% 4.95 10.71 5 3.2
25 Parvati Shallow, Micronesia - FvF Parvati Shallow Micronesia 24.7% 5.68 15.03 5 3.0
26 Wendell Holland, Ghost Island Wendell Holland Ghost Island 24.4% 6.37 21.10 6 3.3
27 Michele Fitzgerald, Kaoh Rong Michele Fitzgerald Kaoh Rong 23.6% 8.31 17.37 5 3.3
28 Tony Vlachos, Winners at War Tony Vlachos Winners at War 23.2% 9.23 17.80 12 8.3
29 Sandra Diaz-Twine, Pearl Islands Sandra Diaz-Twine Pearl Islands 21.4% 6.83 10.63 6 4.5
30 Nick Wilson, DvsG Nick Wilson David vs. Goliath 20.7% 9.50 19.26 7 4.9
31 Tom Westman, Palau Tom Westman Palau 20.0% 12.66 19.27 6 4.6
32 Fabio Birza, Nicaragua 'Fabio' Birza Nicaragua 19.6% 8.80 24.49 5 3.2
33 Susie Smith, Gabon Susie Smith Gabon 18.2% 5.40 21.87 3 1.7
34 Ethan Zohn, Africa Ethan Zohn Africa 17.6% 9.87 18.33 5 3.8
35 Mike Holloway, Worlds Apart Mike Holloway Worlds Apart 17.2% 13.26 22.94 6 4.6
36 Bob Crowley, Gabon Bob Crowley Gabon 17.0% 8.79 21.87 4 2.8

Complete through Winners at War. Click contestant name/picture to view their contestant page.

What is PAE?

PAE is intended to reflect that great, unmeasurable component of Survivor: a finalist's social game. We can only use it to evaluate finalists, because it measures the degree to which the jury votes a finalist receives reflects their physical (challenges) and strategic (voting people out) games. If the finalist receives significantly more jury votes than their prior performance would predict, then it seems likely they had a good social game. If they receive fewer (or no) jury votes, then their social game was probably poor. Straightforward, right?

 

Caveats: (1) Everything is context-dependent: one person's decent social game might look pitiful against a social master, yet brilliant against a belligerent, anti-social troll. (2) Also, if one of the finalists completely dominated every aspect of the game, AND was brilliant socially (Kim Spradlin), they will probably be undervalued here. But it's the best we can do (feel free to debate this assertion in the comments). Here's how we came up with the formula:

 

PAE uses the "No jury" score (ChW + wTCR). First, we calculate "expected" jury score (ExJ), which is the number of jurors (TotJ) times the ratio of the player's No jury score (NoJ) divided by the sum of all the NoJ scores of the finalists (SNoJ). Basically, in a jury of the size the player saw, they should receive ExJ votes. ExJ = TotJ * (NoJ/SNoJ).

 

Then, PAE is simply the actual number of votes received (JVF), minus ExJ, then divided by the number of jurors, or:

PAE = (JVF - ExJ)/ TotJ.

 

The final number reflects the percent of the jury votes received that did not reflect prior challenge or tribal council performance. Or "social game." For example, in Fiji, Earl, Cassandra, and Dreamz had ExJ scores of 3.2, 2.5, and 3.3, respectively (Earl didn't win any challenges). This projects as a virtual tie between Earl and Dreamz. Yet in reality, Earl swept the jury vote, 9-0-0, for a PAE score of 0.65, or 65%. A testament to Earl's ability to convince the jurors to vote for him.