Survivor, like life, is a continuous series of ifs.

If you only look at results then all the winners were equally perfect and we are left with nothing. The path and the decisions made along the way would mean nothing and we wouldn't even have a reason to talk about them. I refuse to consider that absolute philosophy, that unconditional reality.

Put it another way: You are saying that because Denise walked blindly across a minefield without being blown to bits then her strategy was good. Let me tell you that there are better ways to proceed!

1- You missed the point: Most players in Penner's position would have agreed to Lisa's F3 so Denise would have been the one on the jury voting for him. 99% of viewers facepalmed when Penner said "no thank you". Denise wasn't even aware that she had just been given a reserved seat in the F4.
(All those mines were avoided by mere inches)

2- Malcolm was the best challenge performer and Denise was pathetic in that final challenge. Since Malcolm wasn't about to take her to the F3 then she should have pushed to eliminate him earlier. She was damn lucky that Mike won the F3 IC, that Malcolm had shaky hands.
(That atom bomb in her path turned out to be a dud)

3- She had no say in Mike and Lisa's decision to boot Abi so it was only luck that got her passed that TC. Maybe a better player would have realized that earlier and made the alliance with Penner and Carter for example. Or with Abi and Pete. I see Denise and Malcolm siding with Lisa and Mike as an error in judgment that only turned out right for Denise because Mike and Lisa made a bigger error.
(Lisa and Mike stepped on the last few mines when they should have let Abi clear them.)

Volcanoes, you can't control or predict but in this game you have to control and understand people to predict their moves. Denise had very little control after the merge.