Cooller!!

zzz why can't he stop with the luck thing.
This time he was better, last time avek was better.

NO

COOLLER *ALLTIMES* BEST

luck is definitly a part of the game. not to say it was a deciding factor in this one but that point stands.

When he says luck I think he means margins.

Oh my god that light.
He looks like god.

I'm falling in love

best player ever

usually you have to win in order to be the best.

and?

he didn't win.

really? I think I can remember a few wins by cooller.

name one international event he has won in the past 2 years.

i wonder if you can make a bigger fool of yourself with the next reply

name one.

he can and he did. and i assure you, he will do it again.

Yea you're right. Just like ZeRo4; when Rapha figures he's dominated enough he'll ease off and then cooller will be able start winning again.

Dude, please realize that your beloved rapha is just having his initial prime time cooller had seven years ago. Where the latter has been going through all the highs and lows the best usually go through since, who at some point tend to struggle even more with themselves rather than anything else.

Saying that, if you come back in seven years and your champ has a similar track record to show like cooller does, we may talk about who might be the best again. Until then, just understand that some people are taking the grand picture into account when forming opinions.

What track record does he have? He won a bunch of tournaments years ago.

I see 0 wins now. Did he win an event that no one knows about or something?

He played well and got 2nd, losing 3-1 in the final. It was well played but far from winning and proving anything.

Good player and glad to have him around, but best ever? don't think so.

The track record. Looking forward to some comparable info from you, regarding your beloved champ.

Also note that major events virtually didn't exist between the demise of q4 and the recent arrival of ql, likely due also to some organizers going broke during those years you seem to be so obsessed with. Which didn't exactly contribute to the motivation of top players to spend further time on quake anyway.

Now feel free and proceed making even more of an idiot out of yourself than you already did.

Who is my beloved champ btw? I don't seem to remember naming one.

Also this lists proves what I've been saying:
His last international win came in 2006 at Dreamhack, and that was Quake 4.

Well done best player ever, where have you been the past 4 years?

Pete Sampras is the best tennis player ever.

No, he's just a serve-volley whore. And good at it.

Fuck you.

No thanks, I don't do men. You could ask Sampras though, it's been said he swings that way.

1/10

Eh, homosexuals are known to give biased ratings...

Oh I thought you were suppose to kick the ball in tennis... :D

No info regarding your beloved champ then.

And I believe I've already mentioned the grand picture, didn't I. Show me another player who's been giving that kind of sustained performance, over three different installments of quake and over such a period of time and we may talk again.

Until then, the best stays the best. No matter how many here today gone tomorrow players show up.

retardlez, plz die in a fire.

Using this standard, Thresh is the best.

Which standard? And don't tell me prize money.

"did well before, is best always"

Sorry, I thought you were responding to a post of mine which mentioned something like a track record. No clue what kind of message you want to convey there.

Thresh does have a track record - across multiple games, and over dozens of tournaments.

Yeah. It just isn't verifiable.

Give me something where I can compare, side by side with cooller, the tournaments he has won. Which weight they had. If they were national or international. And so forth. That's what I would call a track record.

Give me something like that, and if it turned out that he had better rankings than cooller overall I have no problem to accept him as the best ever. And then consider cooller the best active ever. Abbreviated to "the best".

I've got to tell you though that I at least haven't yet found a single, reliable source which could tell me precisely what all his achievements were. Maybe you can help me out there, given the confidence with which you are making your statements.

I'm not defending Thresh, I'm merely pointing out the fallacy of giving credit to old achievements. If you need a more easy example, just try to compare cooller's achievements to someone like Fatal1ty.

You can claim that a player WAS the best, at a certain time, but mostly only if they quit after taking the #1 spot. In that position, you can't compare them to current standards until they actually participate. However, cooller is STILL participating, and not producing.

I see the same fanboy problems in Starcraft for players like savior/nada/boxer/yellow. It would be fine if they weren't playing anymore, but they are, and they suck.

And I haven't been "attacking" thresh. You make statements, back them up. That's all I've been asking.

And regarding fat, I've no clue how he would fit into a discussion about the best quake player ever. Where the "quake" admittedly has just been implied hitherto, but I trust anybody would agree that it's been that what we were talking about. Not painkiller. Not doom. And not golfing either. Also because cooller didn't use to play any of those.

And regarding the other stuff you say there, I'm tired of repeating myself over and over again. If you want a simplified mathematical scheme how to calculate "the best", take each tournament played, multiply it with a reasonable weight according to it's importance, apply a (inverse) ranking factor and build the average over the sum of that. Do that for each player and you have comparable figures by which you can determine "the best", taking into account the overall achievement.

Besides, cooller just placed second in a major world championship event in a darn close final. In which I at least haven't seen him being outplayed while showing his best game. Which I consider one fucking hell of a comeback. Certainly worth as much as any first in a lifetime win, as far as I'm concerned.

You seem to fail at math. Working 100 hours for $1 an hour is still worse than working 1 hour for $101. It's like saying that you were the best astronomer ever, because you contributed the most to the "world is flat" theory.

Fat has won more tourneys (in Q3 and other Quakes), and in other games. Obviously, you'd have to submit that he's better in EVERY SINGLE WAY. (fat is shit, but by your logic, he is your new god)

You can respect wins for the era, but don't kid yourself into believing that they mean anything today.

Just try again to understand that math. Maybe you'll get it the second time. It's the most forward approach actually, simplified specifically for you because I expected the kind of problem you're apparently running into.

Regarding fat, the same problem as with thresh. You make unsubstantiated claims and that's about it. I look here for example I see some decent performance quite a while back indeed, but still not comparing to cooller's performance in the quake series. Including a last weekend ql world championship second place. And talking of another "era" in that context is fairly ridiculous indeed.

Understand the math? You're trying to argue that "1 + 1 = 2" when you seem to forget that "2 < 3". We don't care about 1, we care about 2 and 3... 2 loses, and so do you.

Fail at 2nd attempt. Worse than I thought. OK then, here in plain text for the obviously challenged

ti = weight/importance of tournament i
ri = ranking in tournament i (1,2,..,m)
n = number of tournaments played
a = overall achievement

and we reasonably define

a = (t1/r1 + t2/r2 + ... + tn/rn) / n

which makes the term "achievement" comparable, in a first best approximation. Of course, one could also use ranking points if there were any.

Anyway, compare that to what you wrote above and you may realize how long the road is you still have to travel.

Ignoring your broken equation, you seem to ignore the scaling of the "weight/importance" of the tournament in relation to OTHER tournaments. Again, you're trying to treat variable components as constants, completely ignoring the inflation. I'll give you some simple math. Assuming all tourneys are first place:

oldwinner = tourney1 + tourney2 + tourney3

newwinner = tourney4

tourney 1 being first, and increasing over time...
tourney1 = 1.0
tourney2 = 1.1
tourney3 = 1.2
...
tourney4 = 5

As newer tournaments happen, all previous tournaments will be devalued. If your equation is any indication, I might have to make this even more simple, but I don't know if it can be reduced any more than "1 + 1 = 2 < 3", and that obviously didn't get through.

That's ridiculous. It's like saying that winning the US Open in 2000 is less worth than winning it in 2010. Which it isn't, because at the time the competition was just as hard as it is now, for each single player.

Look, I can't really take you serious, given how desperately you're trying to talk down other people's achievements. In fact, it's you who seems to be readily receptive to that short sighted fanboyism you've been insinuating on others, by solely focusing on who's just won the last tournament or two.

I've already pointed out that people who perform in any sports over an extended period of time tend to experience their highs and lows. That's why they are rightfully judged over the whole time span.

And I can only repeat that somebody placing 2nd just recently in a world championship, in the third quake game installment he plays, certainly doesn't look like a loser to me. Quite the contrary, when taking the trend into account.

I didn't say cooller was a bad player - I said that he isn't the best. He IS NOT #1, he is #2. This can't be argued in any way, shape, or form. Even if he had won EVERY SINGLE tournament in the past, the sum of all prior tournaments will always be less than the value of the current tournament.

Respect his previous wins for what they are, respect him for being a good player, respect him for his antics, but don't try to give him credit that isn't due. This is not just disrespectful to the winners, it's disrespectful to the entire concept of competition itself.

Sorry, wasn't it about the "best ever"? That's at least what I see when scrolling up to the post which initiated this entire discussion. During which I again emphasized this specific point, and that it is the admirers - me included - who like to occasionally abbreviate this to "the best".

You're right, he obviously isn't "the best right now", in terms of tournament performance. But nobody said that anyway. While at the same time not diminishing the appreciation of his past and present achievements.

Even rapha said it was an honor to play him, and certainly not because he was a lazy old pushover of past times. This was a tough fight at the very top level of current times. And I at least hope to see more of that, specifically from "the best".

he already made it obvious that he doesn't understand the concept of "... ever!"

Maybe it just boils down to the obvious ambiguity of "the best". It could mean the person who's top ranking right now, like Nadal did in tennis for a year or so. Or who was able to rank top level and defend that position for a sustained period of time, like Federer did.

I mean, that's obviously what it is about when we say "the best", isn't it. It's not a "title" you just throw after the winner of the last tournament or two. It's something which has to be earned, over time. And once it has been, it'll stick even through a period of bad performances. Unless somebody takes it away by earning it, over time just the same.

yes, "the best" alone is ambigious.
But "the best ever" is not, at least not to that degree. Vedic and per1klez seem to have trouble understanding that.

Maybe we should just make it "ze best", as a special community lifetime award solely meant to honor cooller. And leave "the best" to those other dudes, to tag it on anybody they like. Could save us all a lot of trouble and time.

Being that RIGHT NOW is the absolute peak of potential, the most recent competition is the "best ever." Here, one more time, in case the numbers were just too much...

lowskill + lowskill + lowskill < highskill

oh it's the absolute peak, is it?

Yes, and?

players can't be better two years from now?

The most recent tournament to the present is the peak.

tat is a thing of opinion I don't wanna discuss.
But you did say "absolute" peak before.

Except it isn't, which is why you don't want to discuss it.

don't you wanna talk about you writing "aboslute", first?

I know you love talking about unrelated subjects, but I'm not interested.

yeah, completely unrelated.

How dare I want to talk abuot something you said. Or are you saying your posts are usually unrelated, cause you might have a point there...

If you don't like my response, you're free to try to talk to someone else about it. I'm sure there's someone out there that you can vent your anger to.

How can I say whether I like your response or not if there isn't one?

But you may rejoice, I'll stop replying now.

Yeah, I expected you would. You should just save time from now on, and see it my way. You could spend less time bastardizing the English language, and I could spend less time mocking you.

Ye, the most recent is the best ever. That's why there's classic moments and matches in all kinds of sports, which prove themselves to be classics just over time.

Look, you obviously have either no clue what you're talking about or just continuing with the single purpose to provoke. Whichever it is, it's making a poor impression either way.

Yeah, they have great moments, but they are not the best. You have an opinion on which events you might have liked, or on the value of the tournaments, but you can't factually state, in any way, that they can compare to current competition.

#1 Rapha
#2 cooller

End of discussion.

how about you factually state why this competition is better than that in any year before.
Oh and please nothing that is based on your opinion.
thanks.

He didn't yet realize that classic matches aren't called such due to a single opinion but rather broad and expert recognition. No use in explaining anything though.

you're right, just look at his "proof" ...

No need to tell me that I'm right. Just take a glance over the whole discussion and you'll see how his evasive tactics works. Each time you nail him down he comes with some junk response.

That response to you is just another example.

yeah, it's funny. He claims that the players had so much time to adapt to this game, while in reality the last significant update which certainly changed gameplay is just 4-5 months ago. :P

This concept we like to call "time."

Feel free to prove it wrong.

What the hell happened to you? Your answers have dropped to jamerio level.

But about your "proof". Imagine a Sine - function over time. where is the "absolute peak" there?

Arguing with you is pointless, as I know you don't understand even the fundamental level of anything you want to argue about.

I've already proven that it's equally productive to properly respond to your questions as it is to just force you to respond with one-liners.

So far you have almost never managed an actual response.

But I have learned to recognize the times where you realize you were wrong, and this is one of them.

Just because you can't read, it doesn't mean it isn't there.

you mean, just because it isn't there, that doesn't mean you can't imagine it?
I agree!

Speaking of imagining, remember when this happened? Good times.

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1835399#pid1835977

Being great at denying doesn't make you right.

Hey, I thought you weren't going to reply. Did you misread your own post?

Go sleep with that. The best stays the best anyway.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

I'm not even here to defend Rapha, as all Quake players can go fuck themselves. I'm just here to stop the rampaging idiocy that is trampling the good name of competition.

edit: typo

Oooh. Totally missed that selfless Jesus was making an appearance here, heroically defending whatever ideals he might consider worth it no matter how unrelated they are to the discussion at hand.

You better stick to your end of discussion man.

More like an equal-opportunity instigator. You're trying to twist facts because you're a fanboy, and because this means something to you, and I'm just here to point out that you're empirically wrong.

The best. Ever. Just memorize that, as reason seems to fail you.

Kinda like how math failed you?

Clown. You've been proven a fake all along.

Regarding your thresh and fat stuff you couldn't back up. While being incapable of differentiating between "the best" and "the best ever". And finally regarding your ridiculous statement that each tournament win would be "better" than the previous one.

Besides those, your math malfunction can actually be forgiven. Because from your pov arithmetic would look like majorly refined skill anyway.

You miss the point - I wasn't trying to "back up" fatal1ty or thresh, only to make the example that it doesn't matter. Is this an alt account of becks, or is the inability to understand basic concepts just common in your country?

Hahahahaha.

OK, you're making claims. Then, when asked to back them up, you can't. And now you're telling us that you didn't try to back them up because your claims didn't matter in the first place.

You're perfectly right. Your claims didn't matter at all indeed, in contrast to what I said about cooller's track record. Statements which I could and did back up. Because they did matter.

Mr. Matterless discussion hero. Looking forward to your next coup de maître.

They are equally useless as the argument for cooller is - THAT is the point. You just need to respect Fatal1ty and Thresh as your true gods, as your own philosophy dictates.

Sorry Mr. Matterless, but I really don't see how a proven and verifiable track record of tournament wins would not matter when talking about the overall achievement of a player. Specifically when mentioned player is the best (remember memorizing that).

You must tell me what you're smoking someday. Because it sure has a devastating effect.

Yes, proven and verifiable victories in checkers, while everyone is currently playing chess. (figuratively speaking, since Quake is only about as deep as checkers)

Accept that you have no mathematical, logical, or even reasonable basis for argument here. You're essentially arguing religion, and attempting to interpret scripture to fit your needs.

I guess what you just said didn't matter, right? Hahahahaha.

The best. Ever.

In your philosophy.

Zzzzzzzzzzeeeeeee Beeeeeeeeeeeeest.

Just making a statement where it matters here. So you know how such a thing looks like. Mr. Matterless.

We call it "preaching."

Does that matter?

Most certainly.

In your philosophy?

Reality.

But that's a reality like checkers, while everyone is currently playing chess, right?

No, that's philosophy.

But what you're saying is equally useless as an argument - THAT is the point. Not that it really matters, though.

Zzzzzzzzzzeeeeeee Beeeeeeeeeeeeest.

Perfect example.

In fact, I have as strong feeling that you're essentially arguing religion, and attempting to interpret scripture to fit your needs. Specifically where it doesn't matter.

Best.

That's the problem, you use feelings instead of logic.

Math: #1
you + cooller: #2

A suspicion in fact. I smell some matter here ... yes, here it is: ze bestest Best.

Perfect example.

The self appointed equal opportunity hero unmattered. Let's raise the flag in commemoration of his selfless deeds. Not his fault that he finally had to succumb, to profane matter.

Bester than bestest.

Thanks.

COOLLER ALLTIMES BEST AND CHAMPION, CAPS FOR THE WIN

so by this logic, schumacher is shit compared to the new drivers?
dude even u can't believe what u're writing, dont make up formulae just for the heck of it :S

If he's still driving and doing shit, he's shit. If he's not, you can't really say one way or the other how he would do, but you also can't say that he compares to current standards.

So to be the best u have to be in your prime all the time, because current fuck up will make shit?

Again, no..

As in the case of cooller, he's still a great player, but he isn't the best right now. By current standards, which are higher than they were in any previous tournament, he isn't the best.

Now, if cooller was coming in last place, yes, he'd be shit. For an example, look at boxer/nada/savior/yellow/etc in Starcraft. They're not just old players who are coming in second place - they lose to terrible players (relatively), and even to foreigners. If you looked at their tournament history, you'd think they were amazingly skilled (gods, even), but it was really just the huge margin of error, due to the lower skill overall.

he's still driving, and if you ask any fan of motorsports, he's the BEST in the field of Formula 1, having broken most records and won most races and championships.
but that doesn't really matter does it?
some guy comes along, and wins the current one, and all of the other guys past achievements washed away right?

No, you can still respect past achievements, they just don't mean as much.

wow, thats the stupidest thing i've heard :P

so if i ask you who's the best driver ever in f1,
u'd just name the current champion wont you?
just like the latest oscar winner movie is the best movie ever, and the latest grammy winner is the best singer ever and so on.....
does that sound stupid to you yet?

It sounds stupid that you are giving examples of opinion-based contests instead of real competitions. You don't seem to even understand what a competition is, let alone the spirit or value.

erm my primary example was formula1, and afaik, its not an opinion based thing, its a real race, with rules and all.
times are recorded and stuff,
did i not get what u meant with that last post :S

I already answered your questions about formula 1, so you lumping it in as if I didn't means nothing.

yeah, and the point is, your answers were incorrect.
I'm sure you were trying to make a point but trust me, this is really getting far too boring.
you're right about the other examples i used though, minor victory!!!
you're still wrong about the whole deal tho.
:P

You can have an opinion the players, but just KNOW that you're wrong when it comes to the cold, hard, facts.

the only hard and cold fact you have is that the player who wins championship is the best,
and thats not even what we was being talked about,
but anyways man, i dont have to defend cooller
:D

The fact is that the most recent tournament is the only one that can be accepted as a full indication of the abilities of the participants.

This is, of course, so long as each tournament is on equal grounds. In the case of Quake 3 and QL, you can't even really compare the two. Sadly, for cooller, he's not the best in either. =X

OKAY,
i'm gonna respond to that by spraying cum all over you :@

the way thresh played, noone would play that way anymore.

the way cooller's generation of quakers (lead by cooller) - i.e. 2002 and onward - played, people still use that style as a standard to go by.

The game has evolved, even from 3 years ago. Old wins deserve a pat on the back, but not much more.

You can't say that someone like Thresh is the best, since we don't know what he's capable of by current standards. However, cooller IS participating in current tournaments, and not winning. Ergo, he is not the best.

he's the best player ever, tho

Yeah, except not.

aaaaaaaAAAAAAAAARGGHhhhhhhhh

so since Michael Jordan didn't win a championship in his last comeback he can't be the best ever?

He was good at the time, but the "best" player is the player who is winning in the present.

no.
You are talking about the best player at the moment.
We are talking about the best player ever.

And just like per1klez you don't seem to understand the difference.

There isn't a difference. You want there to be, but there isn't.

loool.

"Einstein was the smartest physicist ever."
"No, he is dead now and his brain is in a jar."

"Einstein was the most successful physicist of his time."

fyp

You're one cynical bastard. :P

That's just like your opinion, man.

Cooller's past glory has nothing to do with his present losses. I remember Av3k speaking after beating cooller in Quake4 on stage (ESWC 2007 grand finals) when the interviewer called him "the best quake player" and Av3k replied "There's no such concept as #1 player. I just played better than him today."

Rapha has proven that he can beat a legend. So give credit where it's due rather than pushing cooller to the front of queue every time.

cooller is better than av3k though.

What kind of clown are you talking to me in terms of "glory"? Is this kindergarden here?

This discussion was about an objection made to the description "the best ever". Which is a kind of assessment that uses to take the achievements of an entire career into account. Which is what we are doing when using that term, no matter which name du jour might enjoy some ephemeral success.

And didn't I already make a way more deep argument than you seem to be able to follow, when talking about the highs and lows of an absolute top talent? Look at Agassi, for example, who just recently published a book in which he describes the very motivation problems we heard cooller talking about not a year ago. Where the former still was in a business which earned him some serious money. In contrast to quake, which has been virtually dead until recently and offering no prospects whatsoever.

So get off man. You seem to have no idea what all this was about when talking to me about "glory". It's been about who's the best ever. Which admirers use to abbreviate to "the best". Because he still can beat anybody, like rapha in group stage, and be in the final of a world championship.

And when rapha says that cooller beat him in groupstage due to the mistakes he was making, I say the same about the final. Rapha beat cooller due to the mistakes he was making. Had he made as little as he used to do during the tournament, he could have come out on top just the same.

So the best stays the best. Simple as that.

You talk about tennis, yet completely ignore the fact that quake is no different. There are forced and unforced errors. You’re simply stating that Rapha won because he was ‘lucky’ (because the fanbois came up with a national holiday called “Cooller will make mistakes” Day) instead of giving credit to Rapha who actually knew exactly what to do when a certain mistake was made or forced on to an opponent. Making mistakes is part of the game and so is learning from them, and the ‘best ever’ should be a person big enough to learn from them and own them instead of blaming luck.

You can go on and on about what ‘can’ or ‘could’ happen but fail to acknowledge what ‘did’ happen. Rapha happened! I dunno if you watched the CS games but the hot favorites and supposedly best ever (Fnatic) got upset by a totally new team from Ukraine (Na’vi). So what’s next? Cooller writing a book just like Agassi and address his weaknesses as motivational problems simply because he doesn’t want to acknowledge that there are names in the business like Sampras & Federer? Please!

Just like Donnie yen (Martial Artist & Director) says “You could be a black belt in 10 different martial arts or be a famous hero with a lot of rep, but if you cannot make a kick look good on the camera, you’re good for nothing!” Rapha is newer to the scene where as Cooller has been there done that. If he failed to deliver when it mattered the most, he has no one to blame but himself.

I’m only stating that the only thing that is constant is change. You can be at your prime during a phase in life but there will always be someone to supersede you. So the concept of ‘Best Ever’ is an oxymoron.

First off, I didn't say he was lucky. I said cooller wasn't playing his best. Which was most obvious on dm6, with missed jumps, poor rail and rocket aim, impatience and bad dodging at ra amongst other things. All those weren't errors that were forced on him. He made them himself, unfortunately.

Is that good? No. Bad? Not that much. Especially because I at least could see that he was visibly nervous. Happens to all of us, I've been nervous simply watching the game.

Now to the credit. Do I deny that rapha won the tournament? No. He won here, and won some during the past year. Where he lost others at the same time, to dahang. So he's clearly not been the great dominator even just during this short time period. And this last weekend's final was as close as it can get. So what should I give him credit for? Regarding stature, I still have to rate a couple of others higher than him. Like cypher. And like cooller. This may change, but only with time.

Hope that helped clearing up some of the confused ramblings you've thrown there at me.

I stopped reading after this:

"First off, I didn't say he was lucky. I said cooller wasn't playing his best."

I stopped reading after "I stopped reading".

Talking about Fnatic, their website seems to have been hacked and defaced!! This is the image that gets displayed if you visit www.fnatic.com

They're just moving website. Those people naverblind or whatever are just the new designers

Basically: LOLVIRALADVERTISING

Dunno..SK and MYM's sites have seen same attacks in the past so not sure if this is just a server switch!

True they been hacked in the past, but the coding doesn't make sense for it to be a hacker, and judging from the amount of exposure of people going "LOL LOOK AT FNATIC SITE IZ HACKEDZ!" it's seems like decent advertising :p

http://www.neverbland.com/

I was thinking the same coz someone included a traffic analysis script in there..lol!

What being second is not winning?

what have your arbitrary two years got to do with anything?

your best player ever hasn't won squat in how long?

What exactly does that matter?

Toxic hasn't won any Q4 events in years, no longer best.

pele is still considered the best football player ever...

cruyff!

Henry, won everything worth winning.

if we're talking french players, I'd say platini and zidane are more worthy players, a lot more commanding/present on the pitch and a bigger boost to a team

"More presence" / "More commanding" / "Bigger boost" etc are all just terms people use to say "I like Player X more".

Platini played during a time when football was much less developed both tactically and technically and thus it's stupid to consider people from era's such a long time ago.

It's pretty stupid to say "X was/is the best" when the time difference is so large. Platini can only be the best for his era since he hasn't the achievements of others.

It's like saying "Thresh is the best ever" when Thresh has never competed at the level the game is at now (or even at any of the games played!).

Cooller is still playing, competing and being successful though so it's pretty fair to consider him such at the moment. The way Rapha is going he's more than capable himself circumstances willing.

I think Michael Jordan is a much better example.

best player ever!

That's american mentality. In europe, you have to be the best to be the best.

old

Winning 2nd place isn't disapointing realy! top4 would be not bad, 3rd good, 2nd great! ofcors cooller is perfect ( :DD ) so 1st would be pefect for him. Rapha is strongest player , he proved it 101%.

more than 100%=?=?==?

Cooller = 100% = perfect.

Rapha = 101% = 3 to 1 in finals.

rapha was just lucky in the finals...otherwise it would be an easy win for Cooller cause he is just.....well Coller !

omg! u misspell his nickname! burn in hell

Blashpemy! If fox didn't have tremendous bad luck and all his opponents tremendous good luck, he would win every game of every tournament. He is much much better than Cooller, only much much less lucky.

It doesn't matter how many games you win or lose in fact, because it all comes down to this: if you lose, the enemy was lucky. If you win, the enemy was lucky but you still beat him in spite of the odds since you're an amazing genius player.

why does everyone go apeshit when rapha mentions god, but no one says a word when cooller does?

because their former president used to say he was led by god and then invaded Iraq

because cooller can talk about himself as much as he wants

says the guy that knocked him out in dubai.... shame on you

because it came out very differently.
For cooller (and maybe only because he has been in the spotlight for longer) it is just a sidenote.
For rapha it looks much more like a defining factor.

Cooller brings a pack of cigarettes to the stage instead of a bible.

Well the bible thing was after everyone said he was stupid right?

can't remember the exact timing.

In any case the bible still is a sign that it's much more of an defining factor, no matter if it was earlier or later.

he has his reasons tho..
no reason to hate on rapha for being a believer

He can have all the reasons he wants, I still think anyone who believes in a god is stupid.

I don't think anyone ever even suggested they "hated" rapha for believing in god, that would make no sense.

p.s. Smoking is also stupid

i don't mean to hate him... i just meant giving him shit for believing.

and also: its not stupid

It is stupid.

because we want cooller to talk about himself as much as he can

……………………………………..________
………………………………,.-‘"……………….``~.,
………………………..,.-«……………………………..»-.,
…………………….,/………………………………………..":,
…………………,?………………………………………………\,
………………./…………………………………………………..,}
……………../………………………………………………,:`^`..}
……………/……………………………………………,:"………/
…………..?…..__…………………………………..:`………../
…………./__.(….."~-,_…………………………,:`………./
………../(_…."~,_…….."~,_………………..,:`…….._/
……….{.._$;_……"=,_……."-,_…….,.-~-,},.~";/….}
………..((…..*~_……."=-._……";,,./`…./«…………../
…,,,___.\`~,……»~.,………………..`…..}…………../
…………(….`=-,,…….`……………………(……;_,,-«
…………/.`~,……`-………………………….\……/\
………….\`~.*-,……………………………….|,./…..\,__
,,_……….}.>-._\……………………………..|…………..`=~-,
…..`=~-,_\_……`\,……………………………\
……………….`=~-,,.\,………………………….\
…………………………..`:,,………………………`\…………..__
……………………………….`=-,……………….,%`>--==``
…………………………………._\……….._,-%…….`\
……………………………..,<`.._|_,-&``…………….`\

Seriously? Ouch.

Not too surprising for a QL player, though, since you kinda have to be a person of faith to still be playing the game under the assumption that id will ever fix it.

that one was actually not bad :D

he didn't talk about god, he badly paraphrased Russian idiom equivalent to 'thank god'

People say that all the time in Russia, not because they care about god, but because it's a common saying.

OMG LIEK AT THE OSCARS!!???

nice interview.

wish we could of seen it on Friday though.

The semi-final was on Saturday, the same day as the final.

oh right...I knew there was a worthless day in there somewhere but forgot who played.

Maybe the rapha interview can be put above the cooller one? If news isn't in chronological order I get confused

these cooller's jokes remind me of Chuck Norris, except that it's starting to get really don't funny.

Are you saying Chuck Norris jokes were funny at one point in time?
LOL

Are you saying jokes were funny at one point in time?
LOL

Were you funny at one point in time?
LOL

Funny time?
LOL

Funny?
LOL

(gg, wp, I think you won this one!)

You almost had me though :(

A handicap parking sign doesnt signify that the spot is reserved for handicapped people. It's merely a warning that the parking spot belongs to Chuck Norris, and that you will be handicapped yourself if you park there.

if you are about the joke to av3k then yeah it was stupid

Cooller iview? Have a plus!

hero

i think cooller wasn't lucky in the semifinal vs av3k. it's just av3k made a couple stupid attacks and that''s why he lost, but it's just my opinion...and i think as for today av3k is a better player than cooller...and i also think that av3k should play cypher in the grand final, cause when cypher was leading 2-0 against rapha, i was like: EXPECTED, but then he just stopped playing and lost 3-2...

anyway, those 4 guys are definitely top4 in the world and it's hard to predict the score when they play with each other...

i predict the score would be 0 - 0, if they were all playing with each other.

i don't wanna see that.

I wish they'd do a text version.

I really want him to make peace with everyone and concentrate more on winning.

After 8-10 years in the pro-scene, he should learn to be the bigger person in petty mud-slinging contests.

can't disagree with that

wish they would interview players in their native tongue

how typical:

rapha wins the tourney of the year.. yet his interview is second, behind cooller's, has more plusses and more comments.

thats esreality for you :D

it was a tourney of the year only because cooller participated

tourneys are nothink without cooller

who would bother watching a tourney without cooller?!

COOLLER IS THE ONLY ESRS LOVE

he means more to esr than cats to 4chan

"DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! ...suka blyat" :D

i think its not an anti-american thing at all,zero4 czm and others are freaking legends :) but rapha,well...he is like the unpopular church quire boy,.

was more referring to esr favorite player than some country sdtuff

Taken from ESL's Facebook page. Av3k and Cooller, waiting backstage for their match...lol..can someone feel the 'love' in the air?

Those dirty shoes explain a lot

The Velcro explains more to be honest...

Nobody steals his shoes without him hearing about it.

more than coollers pants? also go cry on some random ctf pub server :)))))))))

lolpoland

whiner :((((((((((

lol nothing more epic then a team stacking tard posting about whine.

The last game I played against you was 5 vs 3 and all I said was "cba, one more death and I'm off"... If that's whine, then maybe you're just too accustomed to it in Poland... Nevertheless, that's got nothing to do with this column.

I say again: lol@poland

i dont remember it like that, anyway GG and LOL@ZERiTON fast capper

I barely understand any of your posts... Could you at least try to mold whatever gunk is seeping out of your head into sense?

Cooller's pants? LOL@ZERiTON fast capper? Da fuck?

lol i barely understand ur posts too :D too many smart words for me, im only learning english :( shall we speak polish then? :<

fast cap = fast capture
fast capper = guy who captures fast

sorry for my english :(

btw its irony

Indeed. I see some sense though in not practicing too much buddy love with your opponent right before a match even if it is one. From all I can gather, if that's been any different before the change might well have benefited cooller's game.

luck is a whore :)

Jeez, I just wasted an hour of my life reading this thread -_-

if a thread gets too large, sometimes i only read the +ed posts.

Yeah me too. This time it somehow got interesting but turned out to be an endless discussion.

me too actually, couldn't stop reading when I got to the vedic vs weltschmerz and becks discussion.

pretty sad really, from my part that is...

and u even wasted money for cybersport LOL!

Cooller got an award @ his QL profile saying "Alltimes lucky".
I lol'd.

luck > skill (c) fooze