The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings - Page 8

On July 25 2025 15:36 johnnyh123 wrote:
Actually, my original sentence on the players today are "the best to have ever played SC2" wasn't referring to Serral specifically. In fact, I don't think he's the best player to have played. I think Clem has a higher peak, just look at the 2024 EWC final.

Also, you're missing the fundamental point about competitive depth vs individual achievement.
Infrastructure: Yes, Serral didn't inherit Korean infrastructure - that's exactly why his dominance is less impressive from a GOAT perspective. He succeeded when the competitive ecosystem had already contracted dramatically.

Evidence of stagnation: Your list of "established players" in 2019 actually proves my point. You're naming players who were already established 5-7 years earlier! This isn't strength - it's stagnation. Where are the fresh challengers pushing these veterans? Where are the power hungry kids that is willing to grind it out when they are winning close to $0 per tournament? That's the definition of a declining competitive scene.

Skill vs Competition: You're also conflating individual skill progression with competitive environment - they're completely different concepts.

Yes, today's players are technically stronger because they've absorbed 15 years of accumulated knowledge, refined builds, and perfected mechanics. They absolutely "stand on the shoulders of giants" in terms of game understanding.

But that's exactly why the competitive environment is weaker, not stronger.

Peak Era Comparison: In 2013-2015, you had dozens of players also learning from those giants while the giants were still competing at their peak:
- MVP/Nestea/MC/MMA/etc. still hungry
- KeSPA legends in their prime
- new talent emerging from strong regional scenes
- all pushing each other simultaneously

Today's scene has the knowledge but lacks competitive pressure. From 2016~, Korean team houses were closing, Proleague was gone, and players faced fewer practice partners with less infrastructure.

Chess analogy: It's like claiming today's chess players are in the most competitive era because they have access to computer analysis that Kasparov didn't have. The tools are better, but if there are only 10 serious competitors left instead of 100, the competitive environment is objectively weaker.

Standing on giants' shoulders makes you taller, but it doesn't make the mountain you're climbing any higher if all the other climbers went home.

Regarding military: Your "different styles of competitiveness" argument is backwards. When 30+ year old military returnees can crack top-16/18 immediately after 2+ years away (Challenge B still stands), that screams weak depth. In 2013-2015, military service was a career death sentence - the scene was too competitive.

Innovation, Maru, soO, etc. had to fight through hundreds of Korean prospects just to qualify. Today's qualifiers are thin by comparison.

My closing thoughts: Serral didn't "beat the meta" - he inherited a solved meta and executed it against a depleted field. The fact that we're still discussing 2013-2015 players as his main competition in 2019+ proves the scene stopped producing elite talent.

It's not about discrediting people's skill - it's about context. Dominating 30 teams in the NBA is more impressive than dominating 8 teams, regardless of individual talent level.

On July 26 2025 00:27 Mizenhauer wrote:


It's not Serral's fault that the last KeSPA Draft was held three years before the end of Proleague in 2013.

On July 26 2025 05:02 LostUsername100 wrote:
Serral == Jake Paul of SC2, truly this forum has the best analysts, keep at it guys.

On July 26 2025 00:49 johnnyh123 wrote:


Miz the undisputed TL-SC2-GOAT replied!

I agree 100%, but my argument is that most players today are not playing in the most competitive era of SC2, and it's just hard for me to call them GOATs for winning in the weakest era.

Like, if Serral and Clem teleported back a few years, and were born in like 1994 instead of 2002, competed in the early days of SC2 (2012-15), and won/dominated like today, 100% GOAT.

On July 25 2025 17:52 PremoBeats wrote:


Serral butchered Clem before.. now their last matches have been decided in the last game. I say best in "best statistics". Clem is far from reaching Serral's level in all relevant data sets.

I see it exactly the opposite: He beat players that came out of the best infrastructure the game ever had. That is way more impressive than being forged by that infrastructure and being good.

Again: A lack of new players does not necessarily mean stagnation. The entrance barriers simply have evolved in a more stable environment. Different, not necessarily harder or easier. It is context dependent.

No, I don't. Individual skill is what contributes to competitiveness. For example: 100 C tier pros duking it out is not nearly as competitive as 15 A tier pros.

Yet, the skill is higher than ever.

If you only had 100, instead of 10 because the overall level was lower, that is nothing to write home about (see C/A tier comparison above). I don’t think that is an adequate or appropriate comparison for KeSPA v modern, but neither is your NBA example.

Military was a death sentence because a 2 year break in a 4 year game that is dishing out add ons every 3 years is simply tough to get back into. The release cycle changed, making the environment more stable. On top, new blood became more scare… it was a positive feed back loop until it became ever more unattractive for new players.

Serral pushed the meta and adapted so many times that I have a hard time taking this notion seriously. The main competition of Serral atm is Clem, as he sweeps all others. It was Reynor before. MaxPax in the regionals. AND players from the prime era.

Imo, individual level matters and it is higher than ever. And if the level of play today is the highest we have seen - and it is - then beating the best now is by definition the hardest challenge the game has ever offered, especially when you have a 85%+ win rate monster to beat (going for once away from the fallacious Serral perspective where the SC2 world is only seen from the POV of how easy it is for him to win). I’d agree though, that winning a GSL post 2020 is much easier than before, also because the best of the world simply did not participate.
Another thing that distorts the skill comparison is how GSL (besides Worlds) was the most viewed tournament and there you simply had a system that deployed cruel and unforgiving setups. This amplified the perception of a deeper player field as favorites dropped down more often in these more volatile Bo3s. But had there been more 10-player round robins or 6 player group stages that were fully played out, the favorites would have been much clearer. This means that a GSL (not all tournaments) were much harder to win in the prime era than today. But it doesn’t necessarily translate to a more competitive environment per se, as GSL is just one tournament among many and there have been absolutely easy money grabs back then too, where favorites prevailed regularly.

Talking about 2018, you basically make the argument that the lack of new players from this less than 1.5 year time period since the KeSPA disbandment and the simultaneous decline of the existing pros made it easy for Serral to ascend, which is simply not supported by data.



Half a decade? KeSPA disbanded late 2016, Serral started beating them early 2018. 1.5 years max, not a decade.

Of course Serral learned from them, that is not the point. But standing on the shoulders of giants sounds like these players were any match for him after he turned full time pro, which statistically they just were not. The only one who could match Serral when confronting him regularly was Rogue. All others have crippling win rates against him. And as I statistically showed, it was not because of a mass decline, as the win rates of other foreigners did not go up at the same time or same rate against these very players.


@dedede: The quote by Rogue is the opinion of one pro. The statistics don't support that opinion.

Half a decade? KeSPA disbanded late 2016, Serral started beating them early 2018. 1.5 years max, not a decade.

On July 25 2025 17:52 PremoBeats wrote:


Serral butchered Clem before.. now their last matches have been decided in the last game. I say best in "best statistics". Clem is far from reaching Serral's level in all relevant data sets.

I see it exactly the opposite: He beat players that came out of the best infrastructure the game ever had. That is way more impressive than being forged by that infrastructure and being good.

Again: A lack of new players does not necessarily mean stagnation. The entrance barriers simply have evolved in a more stable environment. Different, not necessarily harder or easier. It is context dependent.

No, I don't. Individual skill is what contributes to competitiveness. For example: 100 C tier pros duking it out is not nearly as competitive as 15 A tier pros.

Yet, the skill is higher than ever.

If you only had 100, instead of 10 because the overall level was lower, that is nothing to write home about (see C/A tier comparison above). I don’t think that is an adequate or appropriate comparison for KeSPA v modern, but neither is your NBA example.

Military was a death sentence because a 2 year break in a 4 year game that is dishing out add ons every 3 years is simply tough to get back into. The release cycle changed, making the environment more stable. On top, new blood became more scare… it was a positive feed back loop until it became ever more unattractive for new players.

Serral pushed the meta and adapted so many times that I have a hard time taking this notion seriously. The main competition of Serral atm is Clem, as he sweeps all others. It was Reynor before. MaxPax in the regionals. AND players from the prime era.

Imo, individual level matters and it is higher than ever. And if the level of play today is the highest we have seen - and it is - then beating the best now is by definition the hardest challenge the game has ever offered, especially when you have a 85%+ win rate monster to beat (going for once away from the fallacious Serral perspective where the SC2 world is only seen from the POV of how easy it is for him to win). I’d agree though, that winning a GSL post 2020 is much easier than before, also because the best of the world simply did not participate.
Another thing that distorts the skill comparison is how GSL (besides Worlds) was the most viewed tournament and there you simply had a system that deployed cruel and unforgiving setups. This amplified the perception of a deeper player field as favorites dropped down more often in these more volatile Bo3s. But had there been more 10-player round robins or 6 player group stages that were fully played out, the favorites would have been much clearer. This means that a GSL (not all tournaments) were much harder to win in the prime era than today. But it doesn’t necessarily translate to a more competitive environment per se, as GSL is just one tournament among many and there have been absolutely easy money grabs back then too, where favorites prevailed regularly.

Talking about 2018, you basically make the argument that the lack of new players from this less than 1.5 year time period since the KeSPA disbandment and the simultaneous decline of the existing pros made it easy for Serral to ascend, which is simply not supported by data.



Half a decade? KeSPA disbanded late 2016, Serral started beating them early 2018. 1.5 years max, not a decade.

Of course Serral learned from them, that is not the point. But standing on the shoulders of giants sounds like these players were any match for him after he turned full time pro, which statistically they just were not. The only one who could match Serral when confronting him regularly was Rogue. All others have crippling win rates against him. And as I statistically showed, it was not because of a mass decline, as the win rates of other foreigners did not go up at the same time or same rate against these very players.


@dedede: The quote by Rogue is the opinion of one pro. The statistics don't support that opinion.

Half a decade? KeSPA disbanded late 2016, Serral started beating them early 2018. 1.5 years max, not a decade.