In part one, released last week, I explained why 
Potti was the first to hold the title of greatest CS player of all time, and over a span of almost half a decade at that. Despite seemingly being cast in stone as the only one who would ever hold that title, eventually others arrived who could exceed even his mark. In this final part of my search for the greatest Counter-Strike player of all time I'll decide between the two magnificent ones of CS: 
NEO and f0rest.
For the last six and a half years they've done battle on CS' biggest and most high pressure stages for the most important titles, perhaps it is a fitting storyline that the greatest of all time should come down to a comparison of the two, their impact on the game and their accomplishments. NEO vs. f0rest is not just the marque match-up of the last decade, it's the argument forums have repeated hundreds of times over. For my part I'll cast my lot here, once and for all, and tell who you Counter-Strike's greatest ever player is, no punches pulled.
The moment you realised nothing would ever be the same again
As I outlined at great length in the first part, Potti was for me the greatest player ever and to an extent, and in so many respects, that I imagined nobody could ever equal him. Sure
whiMp took five lineups to five ESWC/WCG/IEM finals. Sure 
elemeNt had played in four consecutive American CPL finals and led the most statistically dominant team ever. Sure NEO had racked up an epic trophy haul of major titles and f0rest had led his teams to a seemingly impossible amount of top three finishes.
The problem was that the complete package wasn't there in terms of exceeding Potti's greatness across the board. Great players had done amazing things, that much was undeniable, but they were great in their own unique respects and not to the kind of breadth and depth that Potti had managed, that is until March of 2011.
In the first week of March 2011 I was at the IEM V World Championship and during a lull in the tournament I was chatting over a messenger program about the players and teams in attendance. Thinking about NEO, whose ever-improving FX team had barely missed out on a finals spot at the IEM V European Championship, and f0rest, who was now in SK colours and tearing up Group B, the realisation came to me that both of those players had now been top five players in the world consistently, year on year, for the last five years straight.
NEO was sat on four major titles at the time (five if you're someone who counts the first IEM event as a major) and f0rest had won two majors and seemingly a million events of smaller magnitudes. One was close to equaling Potti in terms of in-game excellence and major titles won over the years and the other in terms of in-game excellence and consistency of top placings over the years.
I had been consciously aware of all of these facts but the realisation that flashed across my CS-riddled grey matter was that, since those two players had accomplished their own feats in the modern era, which in terms of amount of competition and the level the game has risen to, can be quite reasonably argued to be the hardest and highest point of competitive CS, that a solid case could be made for each having surpassed Potti. In the same way we can consider modern sports teams who have only won two or three world championships as equal to or better than teams of the first half of the 20th century who won enough to fill a caravan with trophies, so we can, relatively speaking, judge the great CS players in a similar fashion.
This realisation, coupled with a few minutes of thinking back and forth through the careers of each made me realise that at the time CS still showed no signs of being done just yet, so what they had done already could still be added to. Now, a year and a half later, there are no more world championship level majors waiting to be thrust into anyone's trophy cabinets, and in that meantime both players have accomplished more and continued to be amongst the world's best.
Finally, my realisation on that March day has come to full fruition and I must put aside the god of my youth for a new Counter-Strike deity, or two in this case. The two greatest Counter-Strike players of all time, all considered, are NEO and f0rest. Now the question is just: who is the better of the two?
As I showed in my extensive outlining of Potti's stake at being the greatest, when you are considering such a large scale question as this, spanning all those years and tournaments and significant moments, one literally has to consider every factor. It's not enough to cherry-pick a few and ignore those one doesn't like. That said though, in order to make a decision one does have to prioritise specific criteria, and so in deciding which of these two I give the nod I have done just that.
As a final caveat I will add that while I have come to a firm conclusion over who is the greatest of all time in my own mind I do think it is still a discussion that can be had, and not an objective fact which is irrefutable. In my opinion if you think any of my top three are the greatest ever you're right in some senses and wrong in others, they're such unique and accomplished players across the board that the gap between them and every other player in history is far far bigger than the gap between any of this trio. These are the three best CS players ever, it's just up to each of us to decide who gets that hallowed top spot.
Rather than make this process a mystery, with the secret answer to be revealed at the end, I think a better approach is to tell you up front who the best player is in my opinion and then you'll see, as I go through each set of criteria, how I came to my decision, with the reasoning presented in each section. I've come to the conclusion, after much reflection, that NEO is the greatest Counter-Strike player of all time.
Skill-sets never seen before or since
The skill-sets of these two players are as remarkable and astonishing to witness as they are different from each other. Judged in terms of raw skill alone they could easily be the #1 and #2 all-time too. What's so interesting though, is how very differently their skills manifest in the game, and have done over the last five and a half years. f0rest's game is grace, sheer aesthetic beauty and stunningly deadly fluidity. NEO's style is brutal force, unstoppable momentum and a seeming inability to play poorly in big games. Together their skill-sets map the spectrum of what is possible in Counter-Strike at the very highest level, even if they so rarely matchup in any area.
#2 - Patrik "f0rest" Lindberg - Perfect technique personified
If one thinks of professional sports coaching and training one conjures up what's called textbook form, coaches teaching young children the most ideal and efficient method for striking a ball or throwing a punch. The notion is that there is a perfect ideal, which has been borne out through many years of competition and many competitors' play, which has been agreed upon and the sooner a player can begin to mimic that approach, and commit it to muscle-memory, the better his chances at a lengthy and successful career.
In Counter-Strike f0rest is the player you'd pick to showcase perfect technique with the majority of the key weapons, essentially everything minus the sniper rifles. What's so astonishing to me about watching f0rest play is that his technique is perfect, better than anyone else's I've ever witnessed, and consistently so, game in and game out. When Potti played I felt like he had as close to perfect technique as possible, but it was clear it came from analysis and training.
Potti was a technician and he'd taken apart his game, even early on in CS' lifespan, and put it back together so it featured the right variety of firing techniques so as to be efficient in all situations. That was all done consciously though, with f0rest it doesn't feel like that's the case. With f0rest it all seems natural, as though there's no conscious mind deciding when to transition from one technique into another, it all just happens.
The simplest way to conjure up an example in a player's mind would be to give the example of the differing effect range has upon a CS player's technique decisions with the two main rifles, the AK and colt. When a player faces an opponent at short range he is apt to spray full-auto until he has killed him, being as he is close enough to have a good chance of controlling the spray and thus getting enough into his enemy to secure the kill.
If he then faces another opponent at a medium range then the textbook tells us to switch to bursting, with the number of bullets in each burst dependent on both how good our spray control is and how far away the opponent is relative to the player. If he is just within medium range than our player, who is following the textbook, will likely spray 2-3 bullets, and if he hits, but doesn't kill, then begin tapping single bullets to finish off the stunned opponent.
At long range then the distance dictates that it will be very difficult to utilise any kind of spray, since the margin for error is so great with the target being so small. Thus the ideal technique is to fire either two bullet bursts, aimed at the head and pulling down on the second bullet, or at times mixing in single bullets with lots of sideways movement the instant firing is complete.
By now most know these basic textbook concepts, and have seen them implemented many times in all levels of competitive CS. Yet it's key to note that even the majority of top CS players do not play "by the book" in strictly following these technique applications. You will still very good players who spray at medium to long range, or who generally use less precise technique. In f0rest's case though it's rare you ever see him make a mistake in selecting the technique for the situation. It's as though his brain instantly knows when to transition into another technique for the changed range of distance or opponent.
At close range f0rest can spray with the very best of them, combining his flawless movement and body control to deadly effect. At medium range he instantly switches to bursting, yet his raw hand-eye coordination is so incredible that he can consistently burst 4-5 bullets and hit the headshot, where even other pros could only burst 2-3 by default and be successful. At long range his control when bursting two bullets or tapping single bullets at the opponent's head are unmatched by anyone in CS history.
It's not just that f0rest uses the perfect technique, but that he transitions perfectly between them and all with such fluidity and natural feeling that it feels as though his mind never gets in the way of his play, leaving his incredible physical talents to manifest and his aim to dominate. Many have tried to emulate his style, understandably, and yet who has ever managed to? Look at the styles of GeT_RiGhT and GuX, the two other great Swedish players of the last few years, and you'll find elements of the excellent f0rest brings to Counter-Strike, but you'll soon notice the areas in which their games are more one-dimensional or rough around the edges, falling into bad habits or using less efficient techniques in key situations.
I think f0rest is the most skilled player in the history of Counter-Strike, and the guys you'd compare to him in each department of raw in-game skill might be able to match up in one or two areas, but would fall well short when one looks across the board.
#1 - Filip "NEO" Kubski - The chosen one
Contrasting his play to f0rest's the first thing that stands out about NEO's game is that it is far less beautiful, from a purely aesthetic perspective, and yet with no less impact. Where f0rest flawlessly fires bullet after bullet into an opponent in a precise location NEO's spray looks much dirtier and less polished, yet still yields just as many kills. What stands out most in NEO's favour is his sheer breadth of sheer, the depth and variety he possess to his game.
f0rest's textbook brilliance even aligns with the weapon choices one is supposed to make in Counter-Strike. The play of the great Swedish players, who have led the way in CS history, tells us that the best weapons in the game, for the majority of circumstances, are the USP, AK, Colt and AWP. NEO hails from the Eastern Europe which has also embraced, at times somewhat naively, the other weapons of the desert eagle and galil.
If a player has incredible and consistent aim then it only makes sense he would want a usp in his hands on a pistol round, being as the gun can fire bullets with perfect precision, dependent on the pace one fires at, and thus headshots are more likely for the elite level aimers. On the other hand, the less precise deagle can end a lot of firefights in a single shot, even if there is a degree of gamble involved in its use. Likewise, the AK can be used as a weapon of high precision and power, yet the galil can be bought more often and in circumstances the AK cannot, delivering far less precise and less powerful firing, but the opportunity to get kills in situations where otherwise one would be restricted to pistol play.
Understanding this difference in mindset is the difference between the two players' approaches: f0rest's approach is textbook brilliance which aims to win consistently, because it has the numbers and the mechanics on its side. NEO's style is instead about using anything he can get his hands on make an impact on the game with. A kill is a kill is a kill, regardless of if it is a beautiful two bullet burst onto a long-range opponent or a dirty looking 15 bullet spray into someone close-up, as both players are moving. The game cares not which is which, each is worth one only one on the scoreboard and puts your opponents down a man.
NEO can use every single weapon in Counter-Strike to a high level. In the case of everything but the AWP he can be as devastating to his opponents as any player who has ever competed in CS. With the AWP he marks the best example of a rifle player AWPing to my mind. When we think of AWP use it's easiest to divide up players as those whose strength is using the rifles, but who can also AWP, and those strength is AWPing, and can use the rifles to some degree. The degree to which one of those players is strong in the other area is often, strangely, what defines the level of success he can reach.
Most dedicated AWP users have much weaker rifles, and this if one has good rifles at all it will be commented upon and he will stand out from the other snipers. On the other hand, a great rifle player who can also AWP and not be a liability to his team also stands out and soon earns acclaim.
markeloff 
cogu are examples of elite AWPers with great rifles.
NEO is one of the very best, if not the best, elite level rifle players who can also AWP well. The key, as is applicable to the rest of his game, is knowing when to play as a sniper. He does not possess the entire-spectrum game of an amazing dedicated AWPer, at all ranges and in all situations, and thus it's his utilitarian approach which makes his AWPing game work. He has a feel for the moments in a big game when he can get an AWP and secure a specific kill, or hold a certain spot.
This is a huge plus for his team, allowing them moments when the opponent is attacking a spot with a plan in mind predicated against NEO having a rifle, only to find him wielding an AWP and hitting a pre-meditated shot early, putting his team up a man. When you add that dynamic into his excellent killing ability with the pistols and rifles it's easy to see why NEO is the most unstoppable player in CS history. His play isn't pretty but when it comes to killing he is impossibly prolific, seemingly capable of producing kills from every situation.
Where f0rest has the advantage in technique, raw aim and satisfying play to observer, NEO has the advantage of incredible variety across the weapons, a seemingly impossible to predict style and an unstoppable ability to secure a kill by any means necessary. Both rack up kills and carry their teams to titles, they just do it by very different means.
Impact on opposing teams
As strange as it may sound f0rest's style of play is far easier to predict, adapt to and limit than NEO's. What it gains in consistency it loses in how obvious it is. When a team faces f0rest they know the circumstances in which he will attack, from where and with what kind of weapon. Once a player has played him enough they have an idea of the firing style he will use and how it will change as the round progresses. Of course none of this assures the opponents can stop f0rest, the beauty of the all time great players is that you can know exactly what is coming and their execution, thanks to their skill and will, means you will still be unable to prevent their success.
No, the key quality to understand here is of damage limitation. You know, when facing f0rest's teams, that f0rest is going to get his kills and win rounds for his team. But, crucially, by knowing how he will attack you and having a sense of his rhythm you can design an overall approach to limiting him to his less successful areas of attack on the map or putting him into situations which he is less effective from. So, for example, rather than attacking f0rest head on in one of his favourite spots, a team might attack the other site, forcing him to always be the rotating player who has to overcome the odds and win back the site.
I cite that as a basic example because across his career f0rest has not been known as a clutch player in the same sense as the great clutch players are remembered. He wins his share of clutch rounds, but considering he may well be the most skilled player ever he is not known for clutch play as much as one might expect. Think of players like Zonic or face, far less skilled across their careers, and one can immediately think of many more circumstances in which they consistently won 1vX than f0rest.
That is a knock, without a doubt, and yet it is also to an extent due to the way he f0rest's strengths are used. f0rest's best teams have used him as an attacking entry player, opening up sites, and flanking/pushing up as CT to disrupt the terrorists before they have fully committed to their attack. A player can be great without having to necessarily be clutch.
In some sports people do only look at the last shot and if it's made to decide how great a player is, which certainly is a key component of greatness, but it's also worth not losing sight of the fact a game is composed of much more than the last shot. You need the player who can get your team to a position to even have a final shot, when perhaps otherwise you would have been blown out earlier or beaten more convincingly. f0rest is certainly that player, as his unparalleled team prize winnings stats attest. So f0rest is the player you ride during the majority of the game, even if he doesn't always close the deal for you in the high-pressure rounds.
How do teams attack NEO or defend against him? No, really, that's a question, because at this point I have no clue. When NEO's Pentagram teams got their early upsets from 2004-2006 it was easy to give them the element-of-surprise factor, since they had not been amongst the elite teams of Europe, and so people weren't prepared to face their particular style and approach for the game. That only lasted so long though, where other surprise teams soon got figured out effectively dealt with in general, teams like
eSTRO/WeMade FOX and 
Moscow Five being good examples, NEO and his team were never stopped by a team figuring out how to play NEO.
NEO's team would lose, all teams do, and sometimes convincingly, but it was never because someone shut NEO down individually. On the other hand I look at teams like mTw and Na`Vi over the last 2-3 years and f0rest's success level against them dips far below the standard of excellence one expected when he faced the likes of SK. The only person who ever stopped NEO is NEO. Of course there are teams factors which play into how well a player can play within his role, there always are, but we have such a large data set of games to look at that I feel these observations of patterns come about as close to facts as subjective judgment realistically can.
Look, or think, back over the careers of NEO and f0rest and try and find teams which consistently prevented both from winning titles. The list you'll come up with, in terms of consistent road blocks as opposed to occasional thorns, is much larger for f0rest than for NEO. I would even argue I don't think it is possible to stop NEO, his style is just perfect, even if it contains qualities which rely much more on intuitive feeling, timing and a little luck.
f0rest's impact on his team is that his by-the-numbers style will ensure you always get deep into tournaments, on average, and have a legitimate shot at that top three placing. NEO's is that there will be tournaments where, assuming his team doesn't play terribly, you will outright win the big tournament, even if you can't achieve the same kind of long-term consistency from event-to-event.
Team success - the majors and beyond
In a team game, and one that is 5v5 at that, titles won is not a very accurate metric for determining how great a player was over the short term, but when players have played as tournaments, and over as many years, as these two have then it becomes a value mirror to hold up against their individual games and see the strengths and weaknesses which emerge as patterns across their resumes.
Majors - the tournaments that matter the most
The major titles stand above all other tournaments as the ones which matter the most, in terms of prestige or world ranking. There can be tournaments, GameGune 2007 being a good example, which are stacked with good teams and yet they don't have the same impact on history and the world rankings as a major which might not have as deep a field, some of the WCGs being the obvious choice there. To go back to the CPL years (2001-2006), it didn't matter if SK.swe lost at ESWC, which they did twice, if they won the Summer CPL in the weeks following it. The CPL was the event which decided the world's best team for most of those years, the world champions as it were.
Now that example might seem a little confusing, since ESWC was a major tournament also, but it is used only to show the differing impact levels events can have, regardless of the field and their prize money offered. Now, to come more into modern day we have seen, since 2006, a long tournament circuit for each calender year. Back in those CPL days there it was common for even the best teams to attend only 4-5 events in a year, sometimes less. From 2006 onwards all the top teams have gotten closer to 10 or above each year. That makes the majors even more important, even if it isn't immediately obvious why.
If a team won the majors in the CPL days then we had our own criteria for deciding the best team, in that case the one who won the big CPLs over the other majors. That was a way of deciding between teams who had all won majors and perhaps other tournaments. Well, of course we need a similar system for the post-CPL era and that comes in the form of counting the majors first, then moving down the scale of tournaments. So winning the majors immediately puts teams into contention as the best in the world that year/moment, but then we weigh up the secondary tournaments (like Dreamhack, GameGune, IEM European Finals) and finally we consider the smallest events.
By using those three different grades of tournament we can weight up the overall success of a team.So in the example of 2007, back then people considered IEM and ESWC both majors, and so the Poles winning both seemed to have locked up team of the year for 2007. In fact fnatic managed 2nd and 3rd place finishes at those two majors, and then went to win most of the remaining events of 2007, meaning all things considered they were the better team on the whole.
With that out of the way let's consider the majors won for both NEO and f0rest. For reasons I won't go into at length here I don't consider the first IEM a major (short answer why being that only European teams could compete in it) and so by my count NEO has six major titles, five world championships if you prefer. f0rest has three to his name.
It's also worth considering how many times they've reached the final of a major tournament, being as second place in a major is still an accomplishment well worth considering, and shows a degree of consistency at the biggest tournaments. NEO has played in eight major finals, losing only twice. f0rest has played in seven major finals, losing four times. So in terms of finals appearances the two are very close, but in terms of titles NEO is far and away leading the race with twice as many won.
Talent surrounding them
The obvious objection to counting titles directly between individual players in a team game is the effect the quality of your team has on your chances to win a title, and this is where our discussion naturally takes us now. Since NEO has won more major titles the outsider with no knowledge of CS might ask if perhaps NEO had better teams and thus more chances and was "meant" to win more titles, in that regard.
Let's now consider all of the major finals both have played in and if going into that final they were considered the favourite to win the title or not. I will use five different levels of likelihood to win:
1) Big favourites - Expected to win the title
2) Slight favourites - Likely to win the title, but not by a large margin
3) 50-50 - The odds are too close to call and both teams have a similar chance to win.
4) Slight underdogs - Likely to lose the title, but not by much.
5) Big underdogs - Expected to lose the final
Taking those five possible contexts I'll apply them to both's finals resumes:
f0rest's major finals appearances
* ESWC 2006 (2nd) - 50-50
-lost to MiBR
* CPL Winter 2006 (1st) - Slight favourites
-beat MYM.no
* IEM III Global (1st) - Slight favourites
-beat MYM.pl
* WCG 2009 (2nd) - Big favourites
-lost to AGAiN
* IEM IV Global (2nd) - Big favourites
-lost to Na`Vi
* ESWC 2011 (1st) - 50-50
-beat Na`Vi
* WCG 2011 (2nd) - Slight favourites
-lost to ESC.pl
For the sake of people who want to understand the context I'll quickly run through the reasoning behind each judgment, before getting to the conclusions we can draw from them. At ESWC 2006 both teams had never played in a major final before, and both were new lineups on the rise, as a result it was 50/50 who was the favourite. Going into CPL Winter 2006's final fnatic had never won a major title, and had won very little over the entire year, so even though we know now that they embarrassed MYM.no we had no reason to imagine them superior by much facing the likes of elemeNt and REAL.
The IEM III Global Finals was fnatic's break-out event in 2009 with their new lineup, but since they reached the final from the upper bracket, beating then world #1s mTw en route, they could be considered slight favourites over the Poles of MYM.pl, who were the more accomplished team but needed to win twice to take the title. By the WCG that year fnatic had been incredibly dominant, while the Poles had been drifting in team-less oblivion and had just been smashed by MYM.swe at IEM IV Dubai, who fnatic had them beaten.
For IEM IV Global fnatic had four of the five men who had dominated 2009 in their lineup, and were fresh off a very narrow runners-up finish at the European finals to a mouz team which looked spurred on by destiny. Facing a Ukrainian team who had yet to make any deep runs at the top international level, and from a scene which had never once yielded a top two finish in a major, it was easy to pick fnatic as large favourites, especially since they had crushed SK in their semi-final.
October's ESWC 2011 had seen Na`Vi without an event win internationally since all the way back in March, while SK had been the team of the year to that point with a string of victories, since acquiring Delpan, and were 1-1 with Na`Vi in Bo3 series. Finally we have WCG 2011, where SK were facing an ESC team who had beaten them narrowly a number of times across the year, but had looked to be in poor form, while SK had been blazing through the tournament, as a result they were slight favourites.
Major finals conclusions
Returning to the finals for f0rest and his teams we can see that in 100% of the seven major finals f0rest has played in his team was never an underdog of any kind, at the very worst being a 50-50 shot to take the title. In over 71% of those seven finals f0rest and his teams were favourites to win the title.
Let's do a little hypothetical mathematics and grant him one title out of the two 50-50 finals. Then two out of the three slight favourite finals, where he might have been expected to lose once but overall should win more often. Finally all of those where he was a big finals favourite, so two. Our hypothetical trophy haul we should expect for f0rest would then be five out of his seven finals. Instead f0rest only has three major titles to show, despite his teams' very favourable starting conditions overall.
NEO's major finals appearances
* WCG 2006 (1st) - Big underdogs
-beat NiP in final
* ESWC 2007 (1st) - Big favourites
-beat NoA in final
* ESWC 2008 (1st) - Big favourites
-beat eSTRO in final
* IEM III Global (2nd) - Slight underdogs
-lost fnatic in final
* WCG 2009 (1st) - Big underdogs
-beat fnatic in final
* IEM V WC (2nd) - Slight underdogs
-lost Na`Vi in final
* WCG 2011 (1st) - Slight underdogs
-beat SK in final
* IEM VI WC (1st) - Slight underdogs
-beat Na`Vi in final
Going into the WCG 2006 final Pentagram's only significant accomplishment with that lineup had been winning WSVG UK, where the only top teams had been an out-of-form SK.swe and a hoorai team who had never placed top two before. On the other hand NiP came in off a number of event victories that year, and with their incredible comebacks in the Swedish WCG qualifier and throughout the WCG itself they seemed a team of destiny. Everything was different for ESWC 2007, the Poles had won the aforementioned WCG, placed 3rd at CPL and won IEM Season I. In the final they faced an NoA team which was making its first jump up to contending for a title, after being stuck in the 3rd-4th spot beforehand.
For ESWC 2008 the Poles were once more large favourites, facing an eSTRO team who had never won a big tournament of any kind, and had needed inspired play to even go to the final. At IEM III Global, as mentioned in the f0rest section, MYM.pl were the more accomplished team but had twice the task required of them, coming from the lower bracket. Historically WCG 2009 seemed destined to go the way of the Swedes, they had dominated so much that year, but somehow the Poles did the miraculous and overcame everything to win. One should not forget that to even get to that final required narrowly squeaking out of a series vs. the Finns, in fact they had three map series vs. a number of sides (H2k and CMAX.gg also).
Na`Vi had won the last three straight majors heading into the IEM V World Championship final but had also just dropped out in fourth at the European finals, losing the third place decider to the very same Poles they faced now. They had also lost to the Poles on train at WEM, leading many to believe FX was the team with the best chance of taking down the Ukrainians. At WCG 2011, again as mentioned before, FX's form was such that one couldn't put them as a favourite, plus they had never won a major with that lineup. Finally, in the IEM VI World Championship final ESC.pl were slight underdogs by virtue of the fact they'd lost so many big Bo3s to Na`Vi, and hadn't even played in a tournament since Dreamhack, months earlier.
Major finals conclusions
From the eight majors finals appearances NEO and his team-mates have had they've won a preposterous six titles. And yet if we examine the context going into the final we see that a mind-blowing 75% of the time NEO's time was an underdog to win the title, in fact 25% of the time they were highly unlikely to emerge champions.
Doing the same kind of hypothetical mathematics as I performed for f0rest we'll give NEO none of the titles for which he was a big underdog. Then we'll give him one of the four titles from when he was a slight underdog. Finally let's grant him both titles from his times as a big favourite. That totals out at three major titles expected from NEO, when in reality he won six.
Comparing the two
Looking at both sets of data and conclusions we discover some pretty interesting patterns. f0rest's career storyline is that he was in the better team headed into the final the vast majority of the time, and was never less than an even money shot at winning. Meanwhile NEO's teams, by all rights, should have lost most of their finals and certainly lost more than they won overall.
Yet reality tells us a different story, upon examination, and we find that NEO's teams should have lost, but didn't, while f0rest's teams should have won but lost more than they won. When we talk about talent surrounding a player is even possible to make any argument in which f0rest had less talent than NEO during their two careers? If you performed a similar exercise with other great players it would be tough to find any players who better chances to win majors than f0rest, and impossible to find any who had worse chances to win than NEO.
I would make the argument that NEO has won more with less talent surrounding him, and thus worse teams overall, than anyone else in history. That's a huge statement in its own right when you consider that in terms of the biggest tournaments NEO is the biggest winner in the game's history. All of which points to the incredible impact he, as the indisputable star player, had on his teams and their success.
f0rest on the other hand had a lot of good teams, and played with star players ( Tentpole, dsn 2007, GeT_RiGhT, Gux and trace) the likes of which I don't think any of NEO's team-mates can really compare to. TaZ is a very good player but in terms of raw skill he doesn't compare to those players in their primes, with dsn being the closest case.
Consider a final case, which isn't as strongly suggestive upon initial consideration. It's well known that pistol rounds have a significant impact on who wins CS matches, being as it grants almost free rounds when your opponent ecos if you win them. Think back across both team's histories and you could make a very solid case that f0rest's teams were much more likely to win pistol rounds vs. the other elite teams of their eras than NEO's, with NEO's team being in general less skilled and particularly with the USP, which is the ultimate pistol round weapon.
With a better chance to win pistol rounds f0rest's teams again have reasons backing up why they should win more big matches and titles, while NEO's has another disadvantage to overcome on the way to world championships.
Winning is a huge metric for greatness, and especially winning the biggest and most important tournaments. In that respect NEO is far and away better than f0rest.
Other tournament successes and prize winnings
When we move beyond the majors and look at medium and small events then things shift into f0rest's favour. His fnatic teams have been more consistent that anyone over the last five and a half years, with Na`Vi the only team approaching their mark and with no time less to make any kind of run at it. Having f0rest in your teams seems to assure you will make a lot of top three finishes, even if you don't always win the majors. That's very good for winning prize money and consistently keeping a good environment within the team.
As a result no one should be surprised to find out that f0rest leads the way with the most team prize winnings in CS history, at over $858,500. In fact he is over $60,000 ahead of the second place player on that list, cArn. Look back at f0rest's career from Begrip to fnatic to SK and you'll see that other team-mates come and go but the one constant is that f0rest consistently delivers big finishes and a very healthy stream of prize money.
NEO's teams have achieved a degree of consistency in winning so many majors, but the very context that they were so often underdogs is indicative of the lack of overall consistency those teams had. They would pop up to win a major then immediately drop back down the rankings over the next events, losing to teams considered below their level. As a result, next time a major came around their overall stock was low enough to make them underdogs once more, despite their growing golden trophy haul.
It wasn't until the second half of 2010 that we saw the Poles start to deliver consistency, and from that point until late 2011 they finally became a consistent top tier team who could be expected to challenge for every title and potentially ward off all the teams they should, a couple of rare examples ignored. When one looks back over time it's amazing to realise but for all the majors the Poles won NEO's men didn't win many medium sized tournaments, especially in comparison to f0rest's teams. Most of their tournament wins outside of majors came during 2011 alone, long after their first four majors.
Of course winning the majors will rack you up prize money in a hurry, especially considering some have first place bounties of $60,000 and $50,000. So, considering NEO's lack of medium sized tournament wins I can report he still sits at fourth on the all-time list, with over $629,500. He is one of only five to ever surpass the $600,000 mark, and one of 10 to exceed $500,000.
Obviously as far as winning medium and small tournaments goes f0rest gains the large advantage, and in terms of prize money he has a healthy lead.
Carrying the load
One area the two players share quite a lot is the degree to which they were the workhorses of their teams for so many years. When one looks at the ideal composition of elite level teams across CS history then one sees that moving forwards through the years the game, as a result of patches and the development of tactics and advanced team-play, become less dependent on teams being filled from top to bottom with star players. With that pattern noted, it's still key to mention that the majority of great teams, who won a lot of titles, would share the load of putting up frags between two or more players.
If you had two stars then one could have an off game and it wouldn't end your tournament right there, you had enough firepower to go head-to-head with the other elite teams and you also would have times where you could blow the other team out of the water when both your big guns came to play. A perfect example of this team setup would be Na`Vi, where they have great pieces around them but it ultimately has been about their twin stars of Edward and Markeloff how far Na`Vi went.
When we look back at f0rest and NEO's teams they share the distinction of having both of those players as the sole elite level player in their lineups for a number of years. From 2006-2008 f0rest was the lone elite level star in fnatic, and as a result he had to be on just to get fnatic to some of their finals or top three placings. Likewise NEO has always been the number one option in his teams, and likely always will be. Just as dsn and Tentpole's contributions, crucial as they were in 2007 and 2006 respectively, weren't comparable to the load f0rest had to carry, similarly help from TaZ and pasha cannot be placed equal to or above NEO's work carrying the team.
There is a lot to winning matches beyond just frags, but let's not forget that frags are the underlying metric of Counter-Strike itself in many respects. You can have all the team-play in the world and amazing tactics, but if you're being out-fragged by the opponent consistently then you're going to struggle to win games. So NEO and f0rest are so towering talents that they were able to push, and at times drag, their teams through games against equally skilled or better opponents. That's a huge plus for both.
Where we find another difference is in how long they had to carry that heavy load. f0rest had two years where he really was called upon heavily. In 2006 he had a very underrated Tentpole helping him and dsn was continuing to mature. In 2007 Tentpole was gone but dsn had raised his game and was helping as kind of a half-star, think of someone like Delpan or starix in the modern day. From 2009 though, f0rest has been far from alone, having either GeT_RiGhT, GuX or both alongside him in the server. That'll lift the load from your back really quickly.
NEO, on the other hand, has never been joined by a legitimate elite star level player on his teams. TaZ has been a very serviceable team-mate and motivator, pasha has had his maturation process feed into the team's success, but neither have shared that load on NEO's shoulders. So consider for a moment that this man has been the go-to player in his teams from 2006-2012 at the highest level possible. In that respect NEO is unmatched in CS history, and no other star player has come close to his accomplishments playing with a similar level of surrounding talent.
Longevity
The final criteria I will breakdown, and which pertains to the last section discussed, is the longevity of the two players. If we move the mark out to being in the top five players each year then both have managed it every year since 2006, so five and a half years each. However, if we tighten that to being in the top two to three then f0rest begins to pale in comparison to the mighty Pole.
As I mentioned before, when GeT_RiGhT and Gux arrived f0rest's role became less crucial to fnatic winning any given match. There were stretches of a few months where he would show the 07-08 f0rest form, and dominate match after match, but then there were also periods, the middle of 2010 springs to mind, where f0rest was unbelievably just another player in the server, despite his prodigious talent. In deed his SK period in particular stands out in that sense, one can look back at a lot of key matches SK lost where f0rest played just ok, far below the level one used to expect from him.
NEO's story is quite different. From 2006-2007 he was an absolute monster, even if his teams couldn't always get deep in every tournament to make his play matter. In 2008 and 2009 he was still a great player, but his team's time looked to have passed and his individual play was still elite but not as effective. From 2010-2011 his team got to the kind of consistent level fans had been waiting for them to finally hit and NEO once more displayed elite level play event in and event out. Consider that in the first half of 2011 NEO was still regularly topping out tournament stats and generally being hailed as the best player at a given tournament seemingly every month or so.
When it comes to longevity NEO wins out over f0rest and everyone in CS history. You could make a very legitimate case that he was one of the top three players in the world for five and a half years straight, and continues to be today. f0rest remains a great player, and has those flashback games from time-to-time, but in 1.6, which he no longer plays, it was hard to put him ahead of the likes of a markeloff or a trace towards the end.
Final conclusions
So let's draw together all the threads of argument laid out here to conclude why I've picked NEO as the greatest CS player ever. f0rest stands as the most skilled player ever and from that we naturally see him pushing his teams to more top threes than anyone else and winning more prize money. Yet for all his talent, his teams, which have so often been top tier and favoured to win, have not come home with the biggest prizes as often as they should have on paper. A great player, in fact the second greatest ever in my opinion, but with a hole in one of the key spots on his resume.
NEO has the overall package across the board in a way no one else ever has, for me he is the chosen one of CS, the equivalent to his alias' significance in 'The matrix'. Back when players like Potti ruled the game I often wondered what would happen when a kid who had been playing the game since he was a young teenager finally got to the top and had his chance, after so many years playing the game prior. In NEO we finally got to see what would happen under such circumstances.
NEO has been there in the biggest moments to push teams with less talent than any other great teams to the most major titles in history. Despite disadvantages NEO has massively over-performed on an individual and a success level, winning when it seemed as though the opponents were a sure-thing to take the title. What's more those major wins have come spread across a span of half a decade, not all bunched together in any way.
NEO is the greatest Counter-Strike player in history.
My top three CS players of all-time:
#1 NEO - The chosen one
#2 f0rest - Perfect technique personified
#3 Potti - The original Grandmaster of Counter-Strike
Potti was the first to hold the title of greatest CS player of all time, and over a span of almost half a decade at that. Despite seemingly being cast in stone as the only one who would ever hold that title, eventually others arrived who could exceed even his mark. In this final part of my search for the greatest Counter-Strike player of all time I'll decide between the two magnificent ones of CS: NEO and f0rest.For the last six and a half years they've done battle on CS' biggest and most high pressure stages for the most important titles, perhaps it is a fitting storyline that the greatest of all time should come down to a comparison of the two, their impact on the game and their accomplishments. NEO vs. f0rest is not just the marque match-up of the last decade, it's the argument forums have repeated hundreds of times over. For my part I'll cast my lot here, once and for all, and tell who you Counter-Strike's greatest ever player is, no punches pulled.
The moment you realised nothing would ever be the same again
As I outlined at great length in the first part, Potti was for me the greatest player ever and to an extent, and in so many respects, that I imagined nobody could ever equal him. Sure
whiMp took five lineups to five ESWC/WCG/IEM finals. Sure elemeNt had played in four consecutive American CPL finals and led the most statistically dominant team ever. Sure NEO had racked up an epic trophy haul of major titles and f0rest had led his teams to a seemingly impossible amount of top three finishes.The problem was that the complete package wasn't there in terms of exceeding Potti's greatness across the board. Great players had done amazing things, that much was undeniable, but they were great in their own unique respects and not to the kind of breadth and depth that Potti had managed, that is until March of 2011.In the first week of March 2011 I was at the IEM V World Championship and during a lull in the tournament I was chatting over a messenger program about the players and teams in attendance. Thinking about NEO, whose ever-improving FX team had barely missed out on a finals spot at the IEM V European Championship, and f0rest, who was now in SK colours and tearing up Group B, the realisation came to me that both of those players had now been top five players in the world consistently, year on year, for the last five years straight.
NEO was sat on four major titles at the time (five if you're someone who counts the first IEM event as a major) and f0rest had won two majors and seemingly a million events of smaller magnitudes. One was close to equaling Potti in terms of in-game excellence and major titles won over the years and the other in terms of in-game excellence and consistency of top placings over the years.
I had been consciously aware of all of these facts but the realisation that flashed across my CS-riddled grey matter was that, since those two players had accomplished their own feats in the modern era, which in terms of amount of competition and the level the game has risen to, can be quite reasonably argued to be the hardest and highest point of competitive CS, that a solid case could be made for each having surpassed Potti. In the same way we can consider modern sports teams who have only won two or three world championships as equal to or better than teams of the first half of the 20th century who won enough to fill a caravan with trophies, so we can, relatively speaking, judge the great CS players in a similar fashion.
This realisation, coupled with a few minutes of thinking back and forth through the careers of each made me realise that at the time CS still showed no signs of being done just yet, so what they had done already could still be added to. Now, a year and a half later, there are no more world championship level majors waiting to be thrust into anyone's trophy cabinets, and in that meantime both players have accomplished more and continued to be amongst the world's best.
Finally, my realisation on that March day has come to full fruition and I must put aside the god of my youth for a new Counter-Strike deity, or two in this case. The two greatest Counter-Strike players of all time, all considered, are NEO and f0rest. Now the question is just: who is the better of the two?
As I showed in my extensive outlining of Potti's stake at being the greatest, when you are considering such a large scale question as this, spanning all those years and tournaments and significant moments, one literally has to consider every factor. It's not enough to cherry-pick a few and ignore those one doesn't like. That said though, in order to make a decision one does have to prioritise specific criteria, and so in deciding which of these two I give the nod I have done just that.
As a final caveat I will add that while I have come to a firm conclusion over who is the greatest of all time in my own mind I do think it is still a discussion that can be had, and not an objective fact which is irrefutable. In my opinion if you think any of my top three are the greatest ever you're right in some senses and wrong in others, they're such unique and accomplished players across the board that the gap between them and every other player in history is far far bigger than the gap between any of this trio. These are the three best CS players ever, it's just up to each of us to decide who gets that hallowed top spot.
Rather than make this process a mystery, with the secret answer to be revealed at the end, I think a better approach is to tell you up front who the best player is in my opinion and then you'll see, as I go through each set of criteria, how I came to my decision, with the reasoning presented in each section. I've come to the conclusion, after much reflection, that NEO is the greatest Counter-Strike player of all time.Skill-sets never seen before or since
The skill-sets of these two players are as remarkable and astonishing to witness as they are different from each other. Judged in terms of raw skill alone they could easily be the #1 and #2 all-time too. What's so interesting though, is how very differently their skills manifest in the game, and have done over the last five and a half years. f0rest's game is grace, sheer aesthetic beauty and stunningly deadly fluidity. NEO's style is brutal force, unstoppable momentum and a seeming inability to play poorly in big games. Together their skill-sets map the spectrum of what is possible in Counter-Strike at the very highest level, even if they so rarely matchup in any area.
#2 -
Patrik "f0rest" Lindberg - Perfect technique personifiedIf one thinks of professional sports coaching and training one conjures up what's called textbook form, coaches teaching young children the most ideal and efficient method for striking a ball or throwing a punch. The notion is that there is a perfect ideal, which has been borne out through many years of competition and many competitors' play, which has been agreed upon and the sooner a player can begin to mimic that approach, and commit it to muscle-memory, the better his chances at a lengthy and successful career.
In Counter-Strike f0rest is the player you'd pick to showcase perfect technique with the majority of the key weapons, essentially everything minus the sniper rifles. What's so astonishing to me about watching f0rest play is that his technique is perfect, better than anyone else's I've ever witnessed, and consistently so, game in and game out. When Potti played I felt like he had as close to perfect technique as possible, but it was clear it came from analysis and training.
Potti was a technician and he'd taken apart his game, even early on in CS' lifespan, and put it back together so it featured the right variety of firing techniques so as to be efficient in all situations. That was all done consciously though, with f0rest it doesn't feel like that's the case. With f0rest it all seems natural, as though there's no conscious mind deciding when to transition from one technique into another, it all just happens.
The simplest way to conjure up an example in a player's mind would be to give the example of the differing effect range has upon a CS player's technique decisions with the two main rifles, the AK and colt. When a player faces an opponent at short range he is apt to spray full-auto until he has killed him, being as he is close enough to have a good chance of controlling the spray and thus getting enough into his enemy to secure the kill.
If he then faces another opponent at a medium range then the textbook tells us to switch to bursting, with the number of bullets in each burst dependent on both how good our spray control is and how far away the opponent is relative to the player. If he is just within medium range than our player, who is following the textbook, will likely spray 2-3 bullets, and if he hits, but doesn't kill, then begin tapping single bullets to finish off the stunned opponent.
At long range then the distance dictates that it will be very difficult to utilise any kind of spray, since the margin for error is so great with the target being so small. Thus the ideal technique is to fire either two bullet bursts, aimed at the head and pulling down on the second bullet, or at times mixing in single bullets with lots of sideways movement the instant firing is complete.
By now most know these basic textbook concepts, and have seen them implemented many times in all levels of competitive CS. Yet it's key to note that even the majority of top CS players do not play "by the book" in strictly following these technique applications. You will still very good players who spray at medium to long range, or who generally use less precise technique. In f0rest's case though it's rare you ever see him make a mistake in selecting the technique for the situation. It's as though his brain instantly knows when to transition into another technique for the changed range of distance or opponent.
At close range f0rest can spray with the very best of them, combining his flawless movement and body control to deadly effect. At medium range he instantly switches to bursting, yet his raw hand-eye coordination is so incredible that he can consistently burst 4-5 bullets and hit the headshot, where even other pros could only burst 2-3 by default and be successful. At long range his control when bursting two bullets or tapping single bullets at the opponent's head are unmatched by anyone in CS history.It's not just that f0rest uses the perfect technique, but that he transitions perfectly between them and all with such fluidity and natural feeling that it feels as though his mind never gets in the way of his play, leaving his incredible physical talents to manifest and his aim to dominate. Many have tried to emulate his style, understandably, and yet who has ever managed to? Look at the styles of
GeT_RiGhT and GuX, the two other great Swedish players of the last few years, and you'll find elements of the excellent f0rest brings to Counter-Strike, but you'll soon notice the areas in which their games are more one-dimensional or rough around the edges, falling into bad habits or using less efficient techniques in key situations.I think f0rest is the most skilled player in the history of Counter-Strike, and the guys you'd compare to him in each department of raw in-game skill might be able to match up in one or two areas, but would fall well short when one looks across the board.
#1 -
Filip "NEO" Kubski - The chosen oneContrasting his play to f0rest's the first thing that stands out about NEO's game is that it is far less beautiful, from a purely aesthetic perspective, and yet with no less impact. Where f0rest flawlessly fires bullet after bullet into an opponent in a precise location NEO's spray looks much dirtier and less polished, yet still yields just as many kills. What stands out most in NEO's favour is his sheer breadth of sheer, the depth and variety he possess to his game.
f0rest's textbook brilliance even aligns with the weapon choices one is supposed to make in Counter-Strike. The play of the great Swedish players, who have led the way in CS history, tells us that the best weapons in the game, for the majority of circumstances, are the USP, AK, Colt and AWP. NEO hails from the Eastern Europe which has also embraced, at times somewhat naively, the other weapons of the desert eagle and galil.
If a player has incredible and consistent aim then it only makes sense he would want a usp in his hands on a pistol round, being as the gun can fire bullets with perfect precision, dependent on the pace one fires at, and thus headshots are more likely for the elite level aimers. On the other hand, the less precise deagle can end a lot of firefights in a single shot, even if there is a degree of gamble involved in its use. Likewise, the AK can be used as a weapon of high precision and power, yet the galil can be bought more often and in circumstances the AK cannot, delivering far less precise and less powerful firing, but the opportunity to get kills in situations where otherwise one would be restricted to pistol play.
Understanding this difference in mindset is the difference between the two players' approaches: f0rest's approach is textbook brilliance which aims to win consistently, because it has the numbers and the mechanics on its side. NEO's style is instead about using anything he can get his hands on make an impact on the game with. A kill is a kill is a kill, regardless of if it is a beautiful two bullet burst onto a long-range opponent or a dirty looking 15 bullet spray into someone close-up, as both players are moving. The game cares not which is which, each is worth one only one on the scoreboard and puts your opponents down a man.NEO can use every single weapon in Counter-Strike to a high level. In the case of everything but the AWP he can be as devastating to his opponents as any player who has ever competed in CS. With the AWP he marks the best example of a rifle player AWPing to my mind. When we think of AWP use it's easiest to divide up players as those whose strength is using the rifles, but who can also AWP, and those strength is AWPing, and can use the rifles to some degree. The degree to which one of those players is strong in the other area is often, strangely, what defines the level of success he can reach.
Most dedicated AWP users have much weaker rifles, and this if one has good rifles at all it will be commented upon and he will stand out from the other snipers. On the other hand, a great rifle player who can also AWP and not be a liability to his team also stands out and soon earns acclaim.
markeloff cogu are examples of elite AWPers with great rifles.NEO is one of the very best, if not the best, elite level rifle players who can also AWP well. The key, as is applicable to the rest of his game, is knowing when to play as a sniper. He does not possess the entire-spectrum game of an amazing dedicated AWPer, at all ranges and in all situations, and thus it's his utilitarian approach which makes his AWPing game work. He has a feel for the moments in a big game when he can get an AWP and secure a specific kill, or hold a certain spot.
This is a huge plus for his team, allowing them moments when the opponent is attacking a spot with a plan in mind predicated against NEO having a rifle, only to find him wielding an AWP and hitting a pre-meditated shot early, putting his team up a man. When you add that dynamic into his excellent killing ability with the pistols and rifles it's easy to see why NEO is the most unstoppable player in CS history. His play isn't pretty but when it comes to killing he is impossibly prolific, seemingly capable of producing kills from every situation.
Where f0rest has the advantage in technique, raw aim and satisfying play to observer, NEO has the advantage of incredible variety across the weapons, a seemingly impossible to predict style and an unstoppable ability to secure a kill by any means necessary. Both rack up kills and carry their teams to titles, they just do it by very different means.
Impact on opposing teams
As strange as it may sound f0rest's style of play is far easier to predict, adapt to and limit than NEO's. What it gains in consistency it loses in how obvious it is. When a team faces f0rest they know the circumstances in which he will attack, from where and with what kind of weapon. Once a player has played him enough they have an idea of the firing style he will use and how it will change as the round progresses. Of course none of this assures the opponents can stop f0rest, the beauty of the all time great players is that you can know exactly what is coming and their execution, thanks to their skill and will, means you will still be unable to prevent their success.
No, the key quality to understand here is of damage limitation. You know, when facing f0rest's teams, that f0rest is going to get his kills and win rounds for his team. But, crucially, by knowing how he will attack you and having a sense of his rhythm you can design an overall approach to limiting him to his less successful areas of attack on the map or putting him into situations which he is less effective from. So, for example, rather than attacking f0rest head on in one of his favourite spots, a team might attack the other site, forcing him to always be the rotating player who has to overcome the odds and win back the site.
I cite that as a basic example because across his career f0rest has not been known as a clutch player in the same sense as the great clutch players are remembered. He wins his share of clutch rounds, but considering he may well be the most skilled player ever he is not known for clutch play as much as one might expect. Think of players like
Zonic or face, far less skilled across their careers, and one can immediately think of many more circumstances in which they consistently won 1vX than f0rest.That is a knock, without a doubt, and yet it is also to an extent due to the way he f0rest's strengths are used. f0rest's best teams have used him as an attacking entry player, opening up sites, and flanking/pushing up as CT to disrupt the terrorists before they have fully committed to their attack. A player can be great without having to necessarily be clutch.
In some sports people do only look at the last shot and if it's made to decide how great a player is, which certainly is a key component of greatness, but it's also worth not losing sight of the fact a game is composed of much more than the last shot. You need the player who can get your team to a position to even have a final shot, when perhaps otherwise you would have been blown out earlier or beaten more convincingly. f0rest is certainly that player, as his unparalleled team prize winnings stats attest. So f0rest is the player you ride during the majority of the game, even if he doesn't always close the deal for you in the high-pressure rounds.
How do teams attack NEO or defend against him? No, really, that's a question, because at this point I have no clue. When NEO's Pentagram teams got their early upsets from 2004-2006 it was easy to give them the element-of-surprise factor, since they had not been amongst the elite teams of Europe, and so people weren't prepared to face their particular style and approach for the game. That only lasted so long though, where other surprise teams soon got figured out effectively dealt with in general, teams like
eSTRO/WeMade FOX and Moscow Five being good examples, NEO and his team were never stopped by a team figuring out how to play NEO.NEO's team would lose, all teams do, and sometimes convincingly, but it was never because someone shut NEO down individually. On the other hand I look at teams like
mTw and Na`Vi over the last 2-3 years and f0rest's success level against them dips far below the standard of excellence one expected when he faced the likes of SK. The only person who ever stopped NEO is NEO. Of course there are teams factors which play into how well a player can play within his role, there always are, but we have such a large data set of games to look at that I feel these observations of patterns come about as close to facts as subjective judgment realistically can.Look, or think, back over the careers of NEO and f0rest and try and find teams which consistently prevented both from winning titles. The list you'll come up with, in terms of consistent road blocks as opposed to occasional thorns, is much larger for f0rest than for NEO. I would even argue I don't think it is possible to stop NEO, his style is just perfect, even if it contains qualities which rely much more on intuitive feeling, timing and a little luck.
f0rest's impact on his team is that his by-the-numbers style will ensure you always get deep into tournaments, on average, and have a legitimate shot at that top three placing. NEO's is that there will be tournaments where, assuming his team doesn't play terribly, you will outright win the big tournament, even if you can't achieve the same kind of long-term consistency from event-to-event.
Team success - the majors and beyond
In a team game, and one that is 5v5 at that, titles won is not a very accurate metric for determining how great a player was over the short term, but when players have played as tournaments, and over as many years, as these two have then it becomes a value mirror to hold up against their individual games and see the strengths and weaknesses which emerge as patterns across their resumes.
Majors - the tournaments that matter the most
The major titles stand above all other tournaments as the ones which matter the most, in terms of prestige or world ranking. There can be tournaments, GameGune 2007 being a good example, which are stacked with good teams and yet they don't have the same impact on history and the world rankings as a major which might not have as deep a field, some of the WCGs being the obvious choice there. To go back to the CPL years (2001-2006), it didn't matter if
SK.swe lost at ESWC, which they did twice, if they won the Summer CPL in the weeks following it. The CPL was the event which decided the world's best team for most of those years, the world champions as it were.
Now that example might seem a little confusing, since ESWC was a major tournament also, but it is used only to show the differing impact levels events can have, regardless of the field and their prize money offered. Now, to come more into modern day we have seen, since 2006, a long tournament circuit for each calender year. Back in those CPL days there it was common for even the best teams to attend only 4-5 events in a year, sometimes less. From 2006 onwards all the top teams have gotten closer to 10 or above each year. That makes the majors even more important, even if it isn't immediately obvious why.
If a team won the majors in the CPL days then we had our own criteria for deciding the best team, in that case the one who won the big CPLs over the other majors. That was a way of deciding between teams who had all won majors and perhaps other tournaments. Well, of course we need a similar system for the post-CPL era and that comes in the form of counting the majors first, then moving down the scale of tournaments. So winning the majors immediately puts teams into contention as the best in the world that year/moment, but then we weigh up the secondary tournaments (like Dreamhack, GameGune, IEM European Finals) and finally we consider the smallest events.
By using those three different grades of tournament we can weight up the overall success of a team.So in the example of 2007, back then people considered IEM and ESWC both majors, and so the Poles winning both seemed to have locked up team of the year for 2007. In fact fnatic managed 2nd and 3rd place finishes at those two majors, and then went to win most of the remaining events of 2007, meaning all things considered they were the better team on the whole.
With that out of the way let's consider the majors won for both NEO and f0rest. For reasons I won't go into at length here I don't consider the first IEM a major (short answer why being that only European teams could compete in it) and so by my count NEO has six major titles, five world championships if you prefer. f0rest has three to his name.
It's also worth considering how many times they've reached the final of a major tournament, being as second place in a major is still an accomplishment well worth considering, and shows a degree of consistency at the biggest tournaments. NEO has played in eight major finals, losing only twice. f0rest has played in seven major finals, losing four times. So in terms of finals appearances the two are very close, but in terms of titles NEO is far and away leading the race with twice as many won.
Talent surrounding them
The obvious objection to counting titles directly between individual players in a team game is the effect the quality of your team has on your chances to win a title, and this is where our discussion naturally takes us now. Since NEO has won more major titles the outsider with no knowledge of CS might ask if perhaps NEO had better teams and thus more chances and was "meant" to win more titles, in that regard.
Let's now consider all of the major finals both have played in and if going into that final they were considered the favourite to win the title or not. I will use five different levels of likelihood to win:
1) Big favourites - Expected to win the title
2) Slight favourites - Likely to win the title, but not by a large margin
3) 50-50 - The odds are too close to call and both teams have a similar chance to win.
4) Slight underdogs - Likely to lose the title, but not by much.
5) Big underdogs - Expected to lose the final
Taking those five possible contexts I'll apply them to both's finals resumes:
f0rest's major finals appearances
* ESWC 2006 (2nd) - 50-50
-lost to
MiBR* CPL Winter 2006 (1st) - Slight favourites
-beat
MYM.no* IEM III Global (1st) - Slight favourites
-beat
MYM.pl* WCG 2009 (2nd) - Big favourites
-lost to
AGAiN* IEM IV Global (2nd) - Big favourites
-lost to
Na`Vi* ESWC 2011 (1st) - 50-50
-beat
Na`Vi* WCG 2011 (2nd) - Slight favourites
-lost to
ESC.plBig favourites: 2/7 (28.57%)Judgment explanations
Slight favourites: 3/7 (42.86%)
50-50: 2/7 (28.57%)
Slight underdogs: 0/0
Big underdogs: 0/0
For the sake of people who want to understand the context I'll quickly run through the reasoning behind each judgment, before getting to the conclusions we can draw from them. At ESWC 2006 both teams had never played in a major final before, and both were new lineups on the rise, as a result it was 50/50 who was the favourite. Going into CPL Winter 2006's final fnatic had never won a major title, and had won very little over the entire year, so even though we know now that they embarrassed MYM.no we had no reason to imagine them superior by much facing the likes of elemeNt and REAL.
The IEM III Global Finals was fnatic's break-out event in 2009 with their new lineup, but since they reached the final from the upper bracket, beating then world #1s mTw en route, they could be considered slight favourites over the Poles of MYM.pl, who were the more accomplished team but needed to win twice to take the title. By the WCG that year fnatic had been incredibly dominant, while the Poles had been drifting in team-less oblivion and had just been smashed by MYM.swe at IEM IV Dubai, who fnatic had them beaten.For IEM IV Global fnatic had four of the five men who had dominated 2009 in their lineup, and were fresh off a very narrow runners-up finish at the European finals to a mouz team which looked spurred on by destiny. Facing a Ukrainian team who had yet to make any deep runs at the top international level, and from a scene which had never once yielded a top two finish in a major, it was easy to pick fnatic as large favourites, especially since they had crushed SK in their semi-final.
October's ESWC 2011 had seen Na`Vi without an event win internationally since all the way back in March, while SK had been the team of the year to that point with a string of victories, since acquiring Delpan, and were 1-1 with Na`Vi in Bo3 series. Finally we have WCG 2011, where SK were facing an ESC team who had beaten them narrowly a number of times across the year, but had looked to be in poor form, while SK had been blazing through the tournament, as a result they were slight favourites.
Major finals conclusions
Returning to the finals for f0rest and his teams we can see that in 100% of the seven major finals f0rest has played in his team was never an underdog of any kind, at the very worst being a 50-50 shot to take the title. In over 71% of those seven finals f0rest and his teams were favourites to win the title.
Let's do a little hypothetical mathematics and grant him one title out of the two 50-50 finals. Then two out of the three slight favourite finals, where he might have been expected to lose once but overall should win more often. Finally all of those where he was a big finals favourite, so two. Our hypothetical trophy haul we should expect for f0rest would then be five out of his seven finals. Instead f0rest only has three major titles to show, despite his teams' very favourable starting conditions overall.
NEO's major finals appearances
* WCG 2006 (1st) - Big underdogs
-beat
NiP in final* ESWC 2007 (1st) - Big favourites
-beat
NoA in final* ESWC 2008 (1st) - Big favourites
-beat
eSTRO in final* IEM III Global (2nd) - Slight underdogs
-lost
fnatic in final* WCG 2009 (1st) - Big underdogs
-beat
fnatic in final* IEM V WC (2nd) - Slight underdogs
-lost
Na`Vi in final* WCG 2011 (1st) - Slight underdogs
-beat
SK in final* IEM VI WC (1st) - Slight underdogs
-beat
Na`Vi in finalBig favourites: 2/8 (25.00%)Judgment explanations
Slight favourites: 0/8
50-50: 0/8
Slight underdogs: 0/8 (50.00%)
Big underdogs: 2/8 (25.00%)
Going into the WCG 2006 final Pentagram's only significant accomplishment with that lineup had been winning WSVG UK, where the only top teams had been an out-of-form SK.swe and a hoorai team who had never placed top two before. On the other hand NiP came in off a number of event victories that year, and with their incredible comebacks in the Swedish WCG qualifier and throughout the WCG itself they seemed a team of destiny. Everything was different for ESWC 2007, the Poles had won the aforementioned WCG, placed 3rd at CPL and won IEM Season I. In the final they faced an NoA team which was making its first jump up to contending for a title, after being stuck in the 3rd-4th spot beforehand.
For ESWC 2008 the Poles were once more large favourites, facing an eSTRO team who had never won a big tournament of any kind, and had needed inspired play to even go to the final. At IEM III Global, as mentioned in the f0rest section, MYM.pl were the more accomplished team but had twice the task required of them, coming from the lower bracket. Historically WCG 2009 seemed destined to go the way of the Swedes, they had dominated so much that year, but somehow the Poles did the miraculous and overcame everything to win. One should not forget that to even get to that final required narrowly squeaking out of a series vs. the Finns, in fact they had three map series vs. a number of sides (H2k and CMAX.gg also).Na`Vi had won the last three straight majors heading into the IEM V World Championship final but had also just dropped out in fourth at the European finals, losing the third place decider to the very same Poles they faced now. They had also lost to the Poles on train at WEM, leading many to believe FX was the team with the best chance of taking down the Ukrainians. At WCG 2011, again as mentioned before, FX's form was such that one couldn't put them as a favourite, plus they had never won a major with that lineup. Finally, in the IEM VI World Championship final ESC.pl were slight underdogs by virtue of the fact they'd lost so many big Bo3s to Na`Vi, and hadn't even played in a tournament since Dreamhack, months earlier.
Major finals conclusions
From the eight majors finals appearances NEO and his team-mates have had they've won a preposterous six titles. And yet if we examine the context going into the final we see that a mind-blowing 75% of the time NEO's time was an underdog to win the title, in fact 25% of the time they were highly unlikely to emerge champions.
Doing the same kind of hypothetical mathematics as I performed for f0rest we'll give NEO none of the titles for which he was a big underdog. Then we'll give him one of the four titles from when he was a slight underdog. Finally let's grant him both titles from his times as a big favourite. That totals out at three major titles expected from NEO, when in reality he won six.
Comparing the two
Looking at both sets of data and conclusions we discover some pretty interesting patterns. f0rest's career storyline is that he was in the better team headed into the final the vast majority of the time, and was never less than an even money shot at winning. Meanwhile NEO's teams, by all rights, should have lost most of their finals and certainly lost more than they won overall.
Yet reality tells us a different story, upon examination, and we find that NEO's teams should have lost, but didn't, while f0rest's teams should have won but lost more than they won. When we talk about talent surrounding a player is even possible to make any argument in which f0rest had less talent than NEO during their two careers? If you performed a similar exercise with other great players it would be tough to find any players who better chances to win majors than f0rest, and impossible to find any who had worse chances to win than NEO.
I would make the argument that NEO has won more with less talent surrounding him, and thus worse teams overall, than anyone else in history. That's a huge statement in its own right when you consider that in terms of the biggest tournaments NEO is the biggest winner in the game's history. All of which points to the incredible impact he, as the indisputable star player, had on his teams and their success.
f0rest on the other hand had a lot of good teams, and played with star players (
Tentpole, dsn 2007, GeT_RiGhT, Gux and trace) the likes of which I don't think any of NEO's team-mates can really compare to. TaZ is a very good player but in terms of raw skill he doesn't compare to those players in their primes, with dsn being the closest case.Consider a final case, which isn't as strongly suggestive upon initial consideration. It's well known that pistol rounds have a significant impact on who wins CS matches, being as it grants almost free rounds when your opponent ecos if you win them. Think back across both team's histories and you could make a very solid case that f0rest's teams were much more likely to win pistol rounds vs. the other elite teams of their eras than NEO's, with NEO's team being in general less skilled and particularly with the USP, which is the ultimate pistol round weapon.
With a better chance to win pistol rounds f0rest's teams again have reasons backing up why they should win more big matches and titles, while NEO's has another disadvantage to overcome on the way to world championships.
Winning is a huge metric for greatness, and especially winning the biggest and most important tournaments. In that respect NEO is far and away better than f0rest.
Other tournament successes and prize winnings
When we move beyond the majors and look at medium and small events then things shift into f0rest's favour. His fnatic teams have been more consistent that anyone over the last five and a half years, with Na`Vi the only team approaching their mark and with no time less to make any kind of run at it. Having f0rest in your teams seems to assure you will make a lot of top three finishes, even if you don't always win the majors. That's very good for winning prize money and consistently keeping a good environment within the team.
As a result no one should be surprised to find out that f0rest leads the way with the most team prize winnings in CS history, at over $858,500. In fact he is over $60,000 ahead of the second place player on that list, cArn. Look back at f0rest's career from Begrip to fnatic to SK and you'll see that other team-mates come and go but the one constant is that f0rest consistently delivers big finishes and a very healthy stream of prize money.
NEO's teams have achieved a degree of consistency in winning so many majors, but the very context that they were so often underdogs is indicative of the lack of overall consistency those teams had. They would pop up to win a major then immediately drop back down the rankings over the next events, losing to teams considered below their level. As a result, next time a major came around their overall stock was low enough to make them underdogs once more, despite their growing golden trophy haul.
It wasn't until the second half of 2010 that we saw the Poles start to deliver consistency, and from that point until late 2011 they finally became a consistent top tier team who could be expected to challenge for every title and potentially ward off all the teams they should, a couple of rare examples ignored. When one looks back over time it's amazing to realise but for all the majors the Poles won NEO's men didn't win many medium sized tournaments, especially in comparison to f0rest's teams. Most of their tournament wins outside of majors came during 2011 alone, long after their first four majors.
Of course winning the majors will rack you up prize money in a hurry, especially considering some have first place bounties of $60,000 and $50,000. So, considering NEO's lack of medium sized tournament wins I can report he still sits at fourth on the all-time list, with over $629,500. He is one of only five to ever surpass the $600,000 mark, and one of 10 to exceed $500,000.
Obviously as far as winning medium and small tournaments goes f0rest gains the large advantage, and in terms of prize money he has a healthy lead.
Carrying the load
One area the two players share quite a lot is the degree to which they were the workhorses of their teams for so many years. When one looks at the ideal composition of elite level teams across CS history then one sees that moving forwards through the years the game, as a result of patches and the development of tactics and advanced team-play, become less dependent on teams being filled from top to bottom with star players. With that pattern noted, it's still key to mention that the majority of great teams, who won a lot of titles, would share the load of putting up frags between two or more players.
If you had two stars then one could have an off game and it wouldn't end your tournament right there, you had enough firepower to go head-to-head with the other elite teams and you also would have times where you could blow the other team out of the water when both your big guns came to play. A perfect example of this team setup would be Na`Vi, where they have great pieces around them but it ultimately has been about their twin stars of Edward and Markeloff how far Na`Vi went.When we look back at f0rest and NEO's teams they share the distinction of having both of those players as the sole elite level player in their lineups for a number of years. From 2006-2008 f0rest was the lone elite level star in fnatic, and as a result he had to be on just to get fnatic to some of their finals or top three placings. Likewise NEO has always been the number one option in his teams, and likely always will be. Just as dsn and Tentpole's contributions, crucial as they were in 2007 and 2006 respectively, weren't comparable to the load f0rest had to carry, similarly help from TaZ and pasha cannot be placed equal to or above NEO's work carrying the team.There is a lot to winning matches beyond just frags, but let's not forget that frags are the underlying metric of Counter-Strike itself in many respects. You can have all the team-play in the world and amazing tactics, but if you're being out-fragged by the opponent consistently then you're going to struggle to win games. So NEO and f0rest are so towering talents that they were able to push, and at times drag, their teams through games against equally skilled or better opponents. That's a huge plus for both.
Where we find another difference is in how long they had to carry that heavy load. f0rest had two years where he really was called upon heavily. In 2006 he had a very underrated Tentpole helping him and dsn was continuing to mature. In 2007 Tentpole was gone but dsn had raised his game and was helping as kind of a half-star, think of someone like Delpan or starix in the modern day. From 2009 though, f0rest has been far from alone, having either GeT_RiGhT, GuX or both alongside him in the server. That'll lift the load from your back really quickly.
NEO, on the other hand, has never been joined by a legitimate elite star level player on his teams. TaZ has been a very serviceable team-mate and motivator, pasha has had his maturation process feed into the team's success, but neither have shared that load on NEO's shoulders. So consider for a moment that this man has been the go-to player in his teams from 2006-2012 at the highest level possible. In that respect NEO is unmatched in CS history, and no other star player has come close to his accomplishments playing with a similar level of surrounding talent.Longevity
The final criteria I will breakdown, and which pertains to the last section discussed, is the longevity of the two players. If we move the mark out to being in the top five players each year then both have managed it every year since 2006, so five and a half years each. However, if we tighten that to being in the top two to three then f0rest begins to pale in comparison to the mighty Pole.
As I mentioned before, when GeT_RiGhT and Gux arrived f0rest's role became less crucial to fnatic winning any given match. There were stretches of a few months where he would show the 07-08 f0rest form, and dominate match after match, but then there were also periods, the middle of 2010 springs to mind, where f0rest was unbelievably just another player in the server, despite his prodigious talent. In deed his SK period in particular stands out in that sense, one can look back at a lot of key matches SK lost where f0rest played just ok, far below the level one used to expect from him.NEO's story is quite different. From 2006-2007 he was an absolute monster, even if his teams couldn't always get deep in every tournament to make his play matter. In 2008 and 2009 he was still a great player, but his team's time looked to have passed and his individual play was still elite but not as effective. From 2010-2011 his team got to the kind of consistent level fans had been waiting for them to finally hit and NEO once more displayed elite level play event in and event out. Consider that in the first half of 2011 NEO was still regularly topping out tournament stats and generally being hailed as the best player at a given tournament seemingly every month or so.When it comes to longevity NEO wins out over f0rest and everyone in CS history. You could make a very legitimate case that he was one of the top three players in the world for five and a half years straight, and continues to be today. f0rest remains a great player, and has those flashback games from time-to-time, but in 1.6, which he no longer plays, it was hard to put him ahead of the likes of a markeloff or a trace towards the end.
Final conclusions
So let's draw together all the threads of argument laid out here to conclude why I've picked NEO as the greatest CS player ever. f0rest stands as the most skilled player ever and from that we naturally see him pushing his teams to more top threes than anyone else and winning more prize money. Yet for all his talent, his teams, which have so often been top tier and favoured to win, have not come home with the biggest prizes as often as they should have on paper. A great player, in fact the second greatest ever in my opinion, but with a hole in one of the key spots on his resume.
NEO has the overall package across the board in a way no one else ever has, for me he is the chosen one of CS, the equivalent to his alias' significance in 'The matrix'. Back when players like Potti ruled the game I often wondered what would happen when a kid who had been playing the game since he was a young teenager finally got to the top and had his chance, after so many years playing the game prior. In NEO we finally got to see what would happen under such circumstances.
NEO has been there in the biggest moments to push teams with less talent than any other great teams to the most major titles in history. Despite disadvantages NEO has massively over-performed on an individual and a success level, winning when it seemed as though the opponents were a sure-thing to take the title. What's more those major wins have come spread across a span of half a decade, not all bunched together in any way.
NEO is the greatest Counter-Strike player in history.
My top three CS players of all-time:
#1
NEO - The chosen one#2
f0rest - Perfect technique personified#3
Potti - The original Grandmaster of Counter-Strike
