He has won the most "world championships" now right?
2x IEM and one ESWC; Cooller previously had the most world titles with 2x ESWC I think?
There sure is a strong argument for rapha being the best quakelive player ever; his win/loss ration must be pretty similar to toxjq's in Q4, and he is pretty much the undisputed Q4 king (shadowmaster155 permitting).
No. Toxic definitely placed below 1st in a lot less tournaments between 2006 and 2008 than Rapha has between 2009 and 2011 thus far. I think it just goes to show how unbalanced this game is considering even the highest of tiers still had some very consistent winners out of that group of players (ie, tox, cooller, socrates). The likes of Rapha, Cypher, and Cooller have been nowhere near as consistent even though they've been playing this whole time anyways, due in part to poor game design and shitty 10-minute timelimits.
[-]. It was clearly revealed with the way he played in 2005 and 2006 that he has no actual talent -- just an overly dedicated gamer who could play a bit of tennis and hide during grand finals of tournaments.
See toxic, cooller, czm, etc., for examples of players who are actually naturally talented. Fat can't even play Texas Hold 'Em better than a $0.10/0.25 regular, and all he does now is waterlog iPhone after iPhone like a dipshit, hit on girls by asking them if they want to watch old CTF demos of him playing, and basically party in a douchetastic manner.
Yes. Just goes to show how much luck has had a factor in choosing who becomes the poster boy of all e-sports. Fatal1ty has collectively gotten more global recognition than anyone else, after all. ElkY is more famous than him now, but how? By being highly successful at a game involving not only skill, but chance as well.
tl;dr - Fatal1ty is a cardrack when it comes to video games.
As for fatal1ty, he keeps reminiscing about 'the old days' with clan kapitol and how they were the best days... meanwhile czm is still playing in world championship tournaments and casting quake games...
Hall of fame, yes. Best player ever, depends on how you rate it. I would say youre using a small (2/3 years) subset of data to reach that conclusion. Seeing the forest i believe there are better players suited for that title which, anyway, i find very conflictive tbh. A hall of fame as i said would be more fair imo.