"work ethic" is him talking about his work ethic, but when you go deeper in it and he talks more about it - all he does it prac with the team, aimbotz before, aimbotz after, then fpl. No retakes, no dm, nothing, just one thing and one thing only. Now, give me one player who was only good at one thing and made it? He said it him self, never retakes. His aim is god tier, another 20k hours of aimbotz won't make a 0.0001% difference. So why do it? That's why I am sus about that work ethic, like, why wouldn't you play retakes if you play to stay last alive? If you dared to play to win. Work ethic has nothing to do with playing to win - work ethic could as well be him earning his paycheck. And he does. I just don't find him to be a top 10 material if he can't distinguish him self by winning. And I find it bad to encourage that, but then again, rating is flawed and that could be adjusted to deal with such severe stat padding. There was a round against Ence iirc, entire Astralis had AK's except baitF who had Mach10 - guess who was first on site on B rush? Not him, he stopped at the entrance even if he was first and had the best spawn - he let the team go and baited 4 ak players with the worst weapon you can buy. That's one example of a play NO STAR PLAYER WOULD MAKE. Never, ever, Niko would be behind CT spawn by the time blameF decided to follow his team mates. It is questionable how much power Gla1ve has over that team, also questionable how much he cares as he got a child and his priorities may have shifted. We don't know, we do know that calls are not good. I do not understand why you brand me as hater when I damn well praised blameF's aim as one of the best - obviously not criticizing. I find it delusional to think he makes no mistakes just because of a number that's a result of a very flawed formula we call rating 2.0. To go back on Gla1ve - how come no awper after devve ever performed well on Astralis? All underperformed compared to their usual stats. To me it seemed like they never set their awpers up, they mostly played as anchors with awp. Gla1ve never done anything without that one squad.... Also, second tweet from Voo should not be taken too seriously. First one too, like, baitF good on CT but on T side I bet Astralis would like to substitute any of their academy players in. But being good when you have the advantage is not a trait to be proud of, CT side is overpowered so for top 10 I would like to see players who can swing the other way and win against an advantage. I think macro plays from baitF are way too bad for someone who plays star positions and baits entire team to oblivion. Him entering a site looks terrible if there's no one in front of him. If you bait, you need to capitalize on it, or die trying. Same for winning, you either try it or die trying. He saves. I think he has good qualities for an anchor and a second guy in a pack, but if he wants to be a star to win he won't do it like this. And that's criticism, that's not hate. Cause how come Stavn wins more with 1.12 and it orders of magnitude more impactful in every round? Because he chases the win, baitF just sits and waits. Here's one praise people have of s1mple - he's never not involved in a round. He moves and finds ways to be a part of every round. That's how you play to win. Waiting for players to come and saving if they don't come is far from that, not good enough for top 10. But very good for an anchor, he'd be top 1 anchors in the world imho. ez pz, he'd drop like 0.1 in rating but his teams would win more if they had more proactive stars.

I don't hate him, but he does act like a coward a lot of times. You are either a predator or a prey - and when lots of things happen blameF just freezes which is a prey response. Good players pounce and have an instant idea on what to do, batiF just freezes like a possum. Not even an info play, just frozen in place. That's why I don't see greatness when I watch him, I see a good aimer.

blameF carried Astralis.

I enjoy arguing with people and sometimes it's good to see different perspectives. While I disagree with n0quar3r and I think he's widely exaggerating, he does have a point that blameF is too passive. I just think he only sees the cons and not the pros.