Who is better, Saksa or Mata?
Martin "Saksa" Sazdov leads with a GOAT score of 84.7 against 84.7 for Cho "Mata" Se-hyeong — 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 Martin "Saksa" Sazdov and Cho "Mata" Se-hyeong level at 84.7. Martin "Saksa" Sazdov leads on Longevity, Statistics. Cho "Mata" Se-hyeong leads on Peak, Honours, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Saksa wins: Longevity, Statistics
Mata wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/es-saksa-vs-mata-lol
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Saksa leads in 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇲🇰 Saksa | 0 | 0 | 50 | 107 | 322 | 678 |
| 🇰🇷 Mata | 0 | 0 | 58 | 130 | 310 | 660 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 split year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | SaksaActive | MataRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Major titles | 3 | — |
| The International appearances | 7 | — |
| Seasons played | 11 | — |
| Career prize money in millions | 2 | — |
| Tournament finals | 15 | — |
| World Championship titles | — | 1 |
| World finals MVP awards | — | 1 |
| LCK titles | — | 2 |
| LPL titles | — | 1 |
| Professional seasons | — | 9 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 84 | 78 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 84 |
Martin "Saksa" Sazdov leads with a GOAT score of 84.7 against 84.7 for Cho "Mata" Se-hyeong — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Mata scores higher on peak, dominance, honours. Saksa leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Saksa: 84.7, Mata: 84.7.
Make your case for Saksa vs Mata. 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.