i know its a little late for that kind of comment but still i will write it:
arch wrote "We can also mention lucas I guess then, who also won pdl I think, and in really old times was better than scooby for sure at duels."
no he wasnt scooby was one level above the rest of polish players when he was active lucas was known for his dm1 duels mostly (many intensive duels vs warrior who also was top player these days)
In all that players n1 analysis no one said that in a sence of time like many other games q2 is a bit random too, simply cause of this players scheme: A>B, B>C, C>A (you can imagine your 3 players in that scheme, for example: PURRI, provi, Damiah) who is better player? The better will be who plays(trains etc.) more and got some luck to win against other two. Thats why dedication and luck is a part of skill! (other parts contains more aspects). BTW whatever you will say about talent or skill etc. etc., you can reach all of it cause this is biggest part of it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlCRfTmBSGs
My main point about Scooby was not like 'What if he would have played edl-3-4-5-6 etc', but about considering winning NADL as winning an international event because Damiah played there, simple as that. Damiahs adaptation to high pings was just amazing, both wbfinal-grandfinal were extremely extra-high-skilled from both sides. Moreover if we will count period of time when those games were played i.e. between EDL5 and EDL6 when Damiah was unattainable for any of european players, this achievement looks more than decent proof, at least for me. And im not Scoobys biased fan, this is merely how i see this picture
Only and only that is why i mentioned 5 Kings, neither more, nor less. Of course everyone has own personal opinion, here is only one of them. Peace and Luv
Yeh the thing is I don't see any big duel leagues there. In every country there have been national duel leagues, and ppl won those. Did you guys know that? There are 10's of players with a (duel) list like that from 1997-2010. Though not many people won leagues like invitiational or edl.
Ostrołęka Quake 2 1999 Ostrołęka 2vs2 sYnthesis 1st Polska Liga Clanow Q2 1999,online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Clanbase Q2 DM Cup Fall 2000 2nd div, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Polska Liga Q2 I 2000, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Polska Liga Q2 II 2001, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Polska Liga Q2 III 2002, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Polska Liga Q2 IV 2003, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st eCC - Invite Tournament 2003, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st ClanBase Q2 DM Cup Spring 2003 1st div, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 3rd Julycup Q2 DM Cup 2003, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st BNL Q2 DM 2003, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Euro Quake2 League 2003 East div, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Euro Quake2 League 2003, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 5th/8th Mroczna Liga Q2 II 2003, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Extremal Champions League Q2 2004, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Mroczna Liga Q2 2004, online 2vs2 sYnthesis 1st ClanBase Q2 DM Cup Spring 2004 1st div, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 2nd Mroczna Liga Q2 III 2004, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Extremal Champions League Q2 II 2004, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Euro Quake2 League 2003 PREMIER div, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 2nd Euro Quake2 League 2003, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Euro Quake2 League 2004 Supertrophy, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st MANTA LAN Quake2 Cup 2004, KRAKOW 2004 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st sYnthesis Klan roku 2004, PLQ2 1st Ziutowa Liga Q2CTF 2004, online 4vs4 Slaves 2nd National Q2 Deathmatch League I ,online Polska 5/8th National Q2 Deathmatch League II ,online Polska 3rd/4th National Q2 Deathmatch League III ,online Polska 5/8th National Q2 Deathmatch League IV ,online Polska 2nd CL Roku 2004, PLQ2 Scooby 2nd Gracz Roku 2004, PLQ2 Scooby 1st Ostrołęka Quake 2 1999 Ostrołęka, 1vs1 Scooby 2nd Gliwice Quake 2 Duel Gliwice 2001 1vs1 Scooby 1st Polska Liga Duelowa Q2 2003, online 1vs1 Scooby 1st Słupsk Quake 2 Duel Słupsk 2003, 1vs1 Scooby 1st Fur Fun Duel League II Q2,online 1vs1 Scooby 1st Dark Duel League,online 1vs1 Scooby 1st Dark Duel League II 2004, online 1vs1 Scooby 1st Classic Duel League 2004, online 1vs1 Scooby 1st PLQ2 V RG ALLSTARS 2004, online ffa Scooby 1st CL Roku 2004, PLQ2 Scooby 2nd Gracz Roku 2004, PLQ2 Scooby 1st National Q2 Deathmatch League Allstars 4vs4 team *Europe* National Q2 Deathmatch League Allstars 2nd Edition 4vs4 team *A* Polska Allstars 4vs4 team *W* PLQ2 VI Mecz Otwarcia team *W* PLQ2 RG ALLSTARS PLQ2 DM ALLSTARS Clanbase Q2 iTDM Cup Cup Fall 2003 2nd league,online 4vs4 eU 1st Clanbase Q2 iTDM Cup Spring 2004,online 4vs4 eU 5/8th FFX Q3 CTF 2004, online 4vs4 sYnthesis 1st Koszalin Q3 Duel Cup 2000, Koszalin 1vs1 Scooby 1st Szczecin Q3 Duel Cup 1999, Szczecin 1vs1 Scooby 1st
You're right, Quake 2 is interesting because it has depth. There is much to talk about. However, tonight was my last day on Quake 2. I've decided to quit earlier than expected due to real life issues. I think this may be my last post to.
I did consider writing a guide for duelers using my 'puppetmaster' style (The Black Arts) as the core of the topic but I don't think I have the time for it.
A notion: the only reason I actually ever cared to discuss the potential prospects of Q2 itself and its implementations, is that I find Q2 to be the hardest (or at least up till some time) first-person shooter ever released.
I mean, Q2-schooled FPS-players perform relatively well in other games when they move on, and (even strong in other games) incomers have a really hard time adapting to competitive scene in Q2.
This is what makes Q2 interesting to delve into and talk about it.
However, closer to reality, our metaphysical discussion, and often my or your attempts to argue with people about Q2 elaborate topics, are of no value, merely because Q2 nowadays is about basic ass-shooting fun and obsolete yet fully functional competitions (this may sound a bit hypocritical, regarding my previous posts, but I can't help myself when an opportunity of a small constructive argument concerning "metaphysics" of Q2 is presented).
My closing remark would be: Q2 will die one day, but right now let's just have fun watching and playing some games.
Yes, I am aware of competing theories within any branch of science. The same way nature tries to dispute claims of nurture and vice versa, while in many aspects of life, both eddies are the ultimate explanation for everything when combined (except maybe a few radical cases). This is also why I acknowledged the possibility of you being right, I merely intended to point out the alternative possibility, extenuating a jeopardy of some Q2 "zombie" becoming an avid follower of your (at first presented slightly more in one-sided fashion) claims, without trying to validate them or to think for themselves. And, of course, I like to argue, as it is common to all people who study social sciences (psychology grad here!).
I'm starting to like you Sovet, you are one of the view open minded less childish people in Quake 2 who is willing to analyze it through a well formed argument and with a calm academic tone.
You are correct that many people may have developed their game naturally but this is where 'you' fail. You need to realise that approaching Quake 2 from such a Philosophical and Scientific point of view is very dynamic, maybe even ultra dynamic because after all, nature is endless. Yes it is both mind boggling and causes headaches to think such things, hence why I may come across as an eccentic at times. Though I do try to avoid such conversations now days.
I find this problem within 'Sociologists' to, a subject I study at college. I found that they all argue different theories on society but they fail to realise that they are all correct. However, the flaw is that each of their theories has it's shallow parts and it's stronger parts which is dictated by the 'norm'. i.e. Some events may occur but may not be common compared to the majority. All of their theories as a collective make up the bigger picture and even still lacks aspects that are part of natural society.
I hope you can understand what I mean by this. Basically, you are not wrong... however you are only touching the surface on specific points, as am I. Like I mentioned earlier, the is far to much information on the subject to be presented here. I nor have the time or 'dedication' to develop such a report.
I personally see Quake 2 similar to Africa now days. Though it is a beautiful and elegant country it is torn apart by war, conflict and desease.
Hm, you didn't continue with your claim about "many talented players out there". I must add that we are talking within Q2 here.
As for your update, the debate around nature versus nurture is to be resolved yet, so we should drop the taxonomy of skill (learned versus born with). That's why I put "learned" in parentheses, as possible supplementary to the definition. If I asked you to name me a purely learned or purely born-with skill, you would be having a hard time. That is also why I will agree with you that no matter whether it is acquired or natural skill, a player's total capability can be measured via potential, and the latter should be used as a reference point (being measurable via observable results).
Where you fail at, however, is attributing people's progress to training an observed behavior. Many things (like be it a tactical maneuver or general map control) could have been discovered by many players by themselves, without actually first observing it done by another player. Of course you could be right that many players are simply zombies, but you also cannot discard my hypothesis. The only way to test that would be making a poll asking how people learned to play, but in many cases you would receive socially desirable answers, i.e. presenting themselves as capable to learn independently.
My point is, the Q2 does not provide you with many different ways of performing. The general pattern of performance by any random player can easily be equated to Purri's or Damiah's style, but it doesn't mean yet that the player copied it, he could have reached that way of playing by himself, through practice. In other words, developing your own style, for me, is merely finding a way how it suits you during any play at Q2. But that unique style unfortunately will not be so different from those few already presented. The only originality that can rise in the game are those few tactical maneuvers the public haven't seen before and will be "wow" during its performance (a good example is Syanid's rocket jump at Aerwalk versus Damiah in the final; or me camping at SSG stairs at DM1, waiting for low hp opponent dropping from upper rl - not my original idea and not me using it first in the world, but I was the first one to use it in Estonia and made some good contemporary players aware of this tactics, like Aone, when he first started to duel me).
Won't argue about aim. For me, any fast-pace shooter is, in the end, about aim. No matter what the tactics and mental fucking with your opponent, chain on chain in room will resolve who is better.
1. A skill in which you aquire through observation, experience and practice.
2. A skill you inherit and are naturally adept at putting into everyday life. i.e. A talent.
Then there is potential. This is a form of measure that shows how adept a player will become. It is dictated by 'many' factors. Some of which are, understanding the fundamentals of the game, understanding how to evolve as a player, the ability to set yourself apart from others and become an individual, speed in which you learn and an important part, what talents you where born with in which you can bring to your style. There are many more aspects that add to this but I don't have a week to type you a thesis.
As for dedication, this is not part of a skill, it is the reflection of a developed skill. Now pay attention because this is where it all makes sense. An example is that Purri reflects dedication through his achievement of his EDL victory. He also reflects skill and talent.
However, Quake 2 stands as a dead game and has done since approximately 2001. The residing players are generally Purri and Damiah copycats. What I mean by this is that both Purri's and Damiahs style is copied by most players within the last 8 years. This is because these two specific players are landmark players and people look to them to be guided, just as we look to our parents when we grow up and results in similar quarks but not direct copies. Problem with copies is that they are never as strong as the original just like these players will never be able to do Purri's or Damiah's style. This now brings us to why the conventional players lack 'skill'. Players are side tracked by the shiney light (Purri & Damiah) rather than paying attention to the game itself and developing their own style. I am not saying these people are stupid but I am saying that they don't reflect any talent in Quake 2.
Players are now a blend of aim + experience.
They play and observe and learn the game as someone would learn to play the guitar. However, it's not playing the guitar that shows talent but what sounds you get out of it. The extensive play combined with the luxury of modern day broadband gives rise to the conventional player.
This is just a small portion of my views on Quake 2 but I don't intend to write you a whole book on the subject, though the is enough information for it.
By definition, skill is basically a (learned) ability to reach desired results with as few energy and time spent on that task as possible. In context of Q2, accuracy, for example, would be a skill, because the more accurate you are during a game, the less ammo you spend (i.e. the more you spare for another battle and less harvesting is needed), the faster you kill (score-efficiency), conventionally less damage you receive as a result of better aiming yourself etc (less post-war recovery operations)... Basic talk we all agree here wtih.
Arch mentioned "Since when is dedication not part of skill?". Being dedicated, thus both motivated and determined (as you put it), can often grant you better, more energy and time efficient, results, within the constraints of the level of your current skill. So, with this statement you could say that dedication is a part of any skill, since it adds a little to the result achieved by the current skill. An opposite example would be a really talented player who just doesn't concentrate nor is motivated during a game, and as result, gets beaten badly. He had skill, but he wasn't dedicated.
"Being dedicated" can be a sort of a skill by itself, since you can learn to become more motivated and persistent on a task which in result, when in skill area ceteris paribus, grants slighty better performance.
---
Purri is a first class player, just like any other EDL winner or multiple top 3 positioners (i.e. Damiah, Provi, Syanid, Assassin) - or maybe he is a bit better than some of those, but that's completely another topic. Your argument about natural and more talented players is an interesting theory, but without any actual empirical support will remain a hypothesis. What I mean is that if there are players who are really talented and, thus, able to contend for a 1st place in any professional tournament, then why haven't they done that yet? Our system of entrance is not so bureaucratic nor it is closed from different fractions, populations, which would hamper the players from competing for a 1st place, let alone entering the competition. I'll try to be proactive on this one and before you start debunking my claims about disproving your hypothesis, all I ask is to provide me with some empirical evidence of such players ever existing and showing their true talent in games (i.e. references to screen shots , demos etc). Until that, for me, EDL is a tournament with the highest possible level of skill (and dedication) where in the end the best prevail (apart from a few fairly insignificant w/os and unfair decisions by the judges).
P.S. If you're aiming at "they don't need to enter a competition because they won a top player here or there" then a) a proof, as a supporting evidence to your claim, b) a single or a few random games which resulted in favor of presented player is, both, statistically and deterministically not a proof of someone being better (too many random variables to be considered, including luck, bad day for the opponent, opponent's little desire to play seriously during a random friendly match etc), and c) not being able or not wanting to compete at any official and big tournament (e.g. EDL), while maybe having a random win over a top player here or there, doesn't prove a player being better, it may, in fact, prove that it was his best performance and possible advancement is limited (such as actually winning a tournament or beating the rest of the top in a row).
P.S.2 Conjectural assumptions about someone's greater skill (i.e. vague descriptions of someone's superiority without actually conceptually clarifying how that superiority is achieved), such as "a player can understand the game better and more in-depth than any other player" are of no value, as long as these "abilities" remain hypothetical, without actual conceptualized introduction to the scene (i.e. being implemented as a novelty during a game which affects the outcome of the game).
P.S.3 I just spent more than 30 minutes on typing this (...), so I would appreciate if you also spared me from sentences like "you can't comprehend what I mean", that would be quite a senseless teasing, at least without actually trying to explain (in accordance with guidelines provided).
Yet again you look at this to vaguely. My last message was only breif but I expected you to atleast grasp the concept of the bigger picture.
Ofcourse dedication alone doesn't achieve you everything, it does require ability to achieve aswell. The truth is still that the are much talented players out there than the conventional Quake 2 EDL champ.
I will however be the first to admit that Purri is a first class player, I am not trying to debunk his victory here. What I am getting at though is that the majority of modern Quake 2 players are clueless to the 'reasons' behind wins, losses and concept of skill and talent. People only see the elegance of the clock but they don't see the cogs turning inside.
Arch, dedication isn't a skill even in the slightest, it's a combination of motivation and determination. It's something that stems from enthusiasm and it's a frame of mind.
Dedication alone doesn't grant you achievement. Q2 is like any other competitive sport, where you have to train hard or to be natural, and again, train hard. In the end, when players who spent x hours training the same map, the same strategy of map control, the accuracy and opponent "reading" will prevail, and that's something that goes a little beyond simply dedication, it is skill.
Since when is dedication not part of skill? What you talk about is talent, not skill. My cousin had a baby last week, maybe he is the most talented q2 player ever, but well not so dedicated yet no.
Acomplishments themselves are still only opinions.
To measure a players skill and potential you need a wide knowledge and a lot of intelligence to calculate such a thing.
Quake 2, like all things, is like literature - you have to look behind the words to discover the truth.
Congratz to Tarv and all but tournaments don't really reflect as much skill but rather dedication to achievement and they are two totally seperate aspects.
"The people who enter, play and win any league are deserved winners. People who quit/leave or simply don't join leagues for whatever reasons are not. Otherwise Deelita would be world champion of all time "
Everyone is right to their opinion, I wont interfier with that, it's normal and also amusing to speculate sometimes for sure
I just don't like to take anything away from anyone in any tournament or league. What I'm trying to say is, you can't really have a argument that goes like 'What if Scooby would have played edl-3-4-5-6 etc? What if Shub would have not stoped playing 1999?'
Or more relevant to myself as a example 'What if I did not have to leave edl-2 or played quake4 edl-4-5-6? etc' To me the only 'fair' way to see these are to compare actual accomplishments and not opinions.
The people who enter, play and win any league are deserved winners. People who quit/leave or simply don't join leagues for whatever reasons are not. Otherwise Deelita would be world champion of all time
With that said, I don't see Scooby or zyz as a top 5 or even a top 10 Quake 2 dueler of all time. Even if they both had the posibility do be for sure if they entered and won some prestige tournaments. They simply are out classed when it comes to merits/resumes of a lot of players with start from 1998 when we talk 1vs1.
I hope I don't sound arrogant or mean, it's just how I see things. I respect people who perform their best in officials/finals since I know it took me a very long time myself to keep my control and play normal.
It's not a flood, as long as it remains a constructive dialogue. When it comes down to who are the greatest duelers (i.e. to naming someone being one), there must be some sort of an objective "measuring" (i.e. how you define one as one).
PDL is a good criteria to identify a strong dueler, but only within Polish scene. Every year we have a huge base of Polish players competing in EDL, among them the very top of PDL too, but none of them managed to take down a single gold yet (with Assassin being the most successful here).
EDL, to my own knowledge and a humble opinion, is the only international duel league where players from many different countries and different skill levels compete for the gold. The winner of EDL, the way I see it, can also claimed to be the world's best dueler during that season (I'm inclined to believe that Americans will agree with me on that one).
This is the reason why when discussing potential great duel kings, I was referring only to EDL achievements.
I still don't see how doing well in some public games and getting to 1/4 finals in edl1 makes you a top dueller. And the arguement that he quitted after edl2 is a so called non-arguement.
"arch, can we really use terms of EDL achievements to Scooby who was able to play just in 2 first seasons"
No, we cant! But we certainly can't use it to proove he's a top dueller!
Also, I have been owned harder yes blaizz
To z1on, are you sure sovet's link was positive for scooby? Only winning 3-2 with ping 30 vs 100?
More to blaizz, winning nadl, winning pdl and getting to 1/4 in edl, is maybe like 1% of purri's duel achievements. Even when it's more than mine for example We can also mention lucas I guess then, who also won pdl I think, and in really old times was better than scooby for sure at duels.
What it comes down to is that I think it is weird to say someone is a top dueller when he hasn't achieved 'almost' anything in duelleagues. NADL I don't even count tbh :p So it comes down to winning 1 or 2 PDL's where the other top duellers didn't even play. Great... Didn't jol,lucas and goat and many more also win pdl. And didn't they also get far in edl's?
here we are.. arch, can we really use terms of EDL achievements to Scooby who was able to play just in 2 first seasons and didnt finish 2nd one by leaving. have you ever been outclassed harder? http://q2scene.net/edl/index.php?op=descr&id=10331
PURRI, Scooby explained in the comments why he was defensive in that game. and do you think its appropriate to compare ZyZ who switched to another games too early before real international leagues started and Scooby who played his last event in 2008 or even later?
ps: i just feel big sorry for starting this flood conversation, but its understandable now that someone needs to learn q2 1v1 history. eod from my side, have a nice day
edit: sovet, Syanid won Inv2004 with all top players included (fully comparable to any of EDLs). its sad that there is no information on site about this great event
yes sovet,but you must show that to archibalt and Purri,i know that he ownz Damiah 2 times even with a huge ping difference (it was fair for me haha ,ones the scandi player to understand 90% of the q2scene players problem from europ and why they struggled so bad-PING-Internet Connection blaah ) ,and yes i accept some of your opinions arch and purri maybe 50 % is true but i dont see any reasons to dont put ScoobZ on top 5 duelers ever,and those duels Scoobz-Damiah are the most crazy duels i ever saw,maybe some of Purri and Provi performance can be close p.s :Arch is agressive again Purri i think Scoobz deffensive style >than any ather player around
Only game I can remember playing Scooby -> http://q2scene.net/edl/index.php?op=descr&id=10335#com
The demos are also found on DS, watch them if you havent. Probably the most defensive player I ever played against. I cant remember Scooby doing top in any international 1vs1 event though. Good player, but a bit much to mention him as one of the best ever in duel. Same goes with zyz that many seem to like as well and for good reasons, but he never won anything when it comes to duel as well. Syanid is more accomplished than both.
People also seem to forget that edl is only part of quake2 history, there have been other duel leagues/tournaments before/during and after edl. If you don't have facts, then don't mention them.
Underrate what? When you know damiah won 4 edl's or smth, why do you even compare scooby to him, who hasnt won any duel leagues. I know 250 more player who MIGHT have won some tournaments yah. I never heard that one before? There are many more very good tdm players who never bothered with duel really. And when they did play, they were good. Still that doesn't make it right to call them top duellers. You need to prove that in the leagues imo.
ah and 1 thing, if u still have some personal issues just come 2 on polish server and duel me on low ping then u will see how i can realize my normal tax, cose everytime i play duel8 in EDL i have 2 face my PING! Scoobz words ,so dont underrate hes duelz skillz btw - i like those words
Kicia, hugs, but dont be too hasty dismissing RLs statement.
There are many ways how you can name someone "being a Q2 duel king". If you consider only EDL 1st place achievements, then Rl is right: Damiah, Purri and Provi.
But saying that Syanid is like Ibogine in duel... Syanid has been in top 3 now for 4 times, three of them finishing in second. No offence to Ibo, but Syanid is way more accomplished duel player.
Then why did scooby lose to assasin in edl1, and ass loses to sya, provi, purri, dami... What 'could have been'. Scooby was at his top already and one of the best players in q2 ever.
That doesn't mean that hes as good as these players at duel. For sure he wouldn't have won 2 or 3 edl's...
i can tell 1 thing since im around the q2scene -Scoobz is the best player i ever saw (duels,tdm) !!! To bad he have to go so early for usa and let us wondering what could happend! (no doubt he can winning 2 or 3 edls for sure )
sovet, high five, agree, Assasin is awesome. just recognized how brilliant his performance was, especially during Invitational2004, EDL1 and EDL2! so.. thats right, they both deserve lots of respect! two polish legends..
yeah, lan-tournament with all top players is a sweet dream! maybe one day
Scooby is 1337 tp player for me, hands down. But I would even forward Assassin before Scooby in terms of EDL achievements (at least twice in top 3). On general, maybe Scooby is better, who knows... would love to see that matchup.
Though, Assassin is not performing well last 2 years...
P.S. It's sad that Purri just gave up twice and gave away third place, thus reducing the value of top three in EDL. I mean, getting in the top 4, thumbs up for Gerdt and Zorre, but I don't think they were a match up for fully motivated Purri.
sovet its 2easy but assuming that you have counted all 4 scandi masters its forgivable that you forgot the guy who was one of main favourites in EDL2 before leaving, who then moved to America where was completely unmatched and where after the long run won NADL beating one of those scandi kings, maybe not on even pings but still in really cool fashion. guess WHO?
actually I wasn't nervous at all, I just couldn't find "my game" and feeling to the game. There are many reasons why I didn't feel comfortable playing throughout the whole season, starting from my ridiculous PC which nowadays runs q2 with just over 100fps, all the way to this horrid berling server where I had to play because there were really no alternatives. Not looking to put out excuses though, I played bad and deserved to loose this game. Congrats to purri tho and cheers for isb, mrt, turri and any other I had chance to play with trying to get some warmup :-)
Syanid definately can do better. EDL6 semi is good example of how it could being turned out in different days for those players Archi, there are five kings of quake2 1v1 and Syanid is one of them period its axiom for anyone who follow the scene
Well maybe that is why purri and damiah are the best duellers in the end. They are pretty much always good. They don't really have bad days, just need some prac a week and they will be in shape :p That's what my impression is at least.
Syanid was way too nerveous! He can do better His state of mind took away the intrigue of the final... Was very much looking forward to see the stone-cold syanid. Pitty...
gg's Syanid and thanks to admins for another well done edl league! [uNCLe] was my first clan and PuRiFieR my first nick I used from 1998 to ~2000, so felt a bit nostalgic by using that in this particular final. See you next season!
Congratz to Purri,pfff it was a 1 side match,daaaamn he is too Go(o)D. I was for Sya,but he loose in the closer moments of the match ,looks like scared or not sure in his ability to make the break out... ,anyway congratz Syanid pretty well deserved 2nd place ;/ wish you luck
Purri is now the second player in the EDL history to take home two consecutive EDL golds.
Congratz!
And more luck/better play next time, Syanid.
I wish EDL #9 would consist of Purri, Syanid, Damiah, Provi, and the others who can compete for the top 4. Will Purri make the history by winning three EDLs in a row, something that was denied from Damiah for two times, or will we have someone else, a new face, taking down the gold?
PURRI
wision
To bad he have to go so early for usa and let us wondering what could happend! (no doubt he can winning 2 or 3 edls for sure ) 
,anyway congratz Syanid pretty well deserved 2nd place ;/ wish you luck