Who is better, jabbi or Resolut1on?
Jakob "jabbi" Nygaard leads with a GOAT score of 81.6 against 81.6 for Resolut1on — 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 Jakob "jabbi" Nygaard and Resolut1on level at 81.6. Jakob "jabbi" Nygaard leads on Statistics, Peak, Dominance. Resolut1on leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →jabbi wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Resolut1on wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/es-jabbi-vs-resolut1on-d2
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
jabbi 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇩🇰 jabbi | 0 | 0 | 50 | 109 | 338 | 607 |
| 🇺🇦 Resolut1on | 0 | 0 | 52 | 117 | 374 | 696 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 split year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | jabbiActive | Resolut1onActive |
|---|---|---|
| Big tournament titles | 7 | — |
| HLTV top-20 placements | 1 | — |
| Major playoff appearances | 2 | — |
| Seasons played | 7 | — |
| Tournament finals | 9 | — |
| TI finals | — | 1 |
| Premier tournament wins | — | 4 |
| TI appearances | — | 6 |
| Career seasons | — | 12 |
| Career prize money (USD m) | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 78 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 87 |
| Longevity w20% | 72 | 82 |
| Honours w20% | 80 | 80 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 82 |
Jakob "jabbi" Nygaard leads with a GOAT score of 81.6 against 81.6 for Resolut1on — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Resolut1on scores higher on longevity. jabbi leads on peak, dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. jabbi: 81.6, Resolut1on: 81.6.
Make your case for jabbi vs Resolut1on. 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.