Who is better, Aleksib or Rekkles?
Aleksi "Aleksib" Virolainen leads with a GOAT score of 87.0 against 87.0 for Martin "Rekkles" Larsson — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Aleksi "Aleksib" Virolainen and Martin "Rekkles" Larsson level at 87.0. Aleksi "Aleksib" Virolainen leads on Dominance, Peak, Honours. Martin "Rekkles" Larsson leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Aleksib wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Rekkles wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/es-aleksib-vs-rekkles-lol
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Aleksib leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇫🇮 Aleksib | 0 | 0 | 50 | 106 | 307 | 653 |
| 🇸🇪 Rekkles | 0 | 0 | 58 | 128 | 294 | 740 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 split year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | AleksibActive | RekklesRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Majors won | 1 | — |
| Big tournament titles | 10 | — |
| Major playoff appearances | 6 | — |
| Seasons played | 11 | — |
| Teams captained | 4 | — |
| LEC titles | — | 6 |
| World finals | — | 1 |
| World Championship appearances | — | 7 |
| LEC MVP awards | — | 2 |
| Professional seasons | — | 12 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 84 | 92 |
| Honours w20% | 88 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 86 |
Aleksi "Aleksib" Virolainen leads with a GOAT score of 87.0 against 87.0 for Martin "Rekkles" Larsson — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Rekkles scores higher on longevity. Aleksib leads on peak, dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Aleksib: 87.0, Rekkles: 87.0.
Make your case for Aleksib vs Rekkles. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.