Who is better, seang@res or Tian?
Gao "Tian" Tian-Liang leads with a GOAT score of 80.5 against 80.4 for Sean "seang@res" Gares — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Gao "Tian" Tian-Liang above Sean "seang@res" Gares: 80.5 vs 80.4. Gao "Tian" Tian-Liang leads on Peak, Honours. Sean "seang@res" Gares leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Tian wins: Peak, Honours
seang@res wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/es-sgares-vs-tian-lol
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Tian leads in 3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 seang@res | 0 | 0 | 50 | 107 | 242 | 634 |
| 🇨🇳 Tian | 0 | 0 | 66 | 144 | 400 | 610 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 split year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | seang@resRetired | TianActive |
|---|---|---|
| Major playoff appearances | 2 | — |
| Big tournament titles | 3 | — |
| Seasons played | 10 | — |
| Teams captained | 4 | — |
| Tournament finals | 6 | — |
| World Championship titles | — | 1 |
| LPL titles | — | 2 |
| World Championship appearances | — | 2 |
| LPL finals | — | 3 |
| Professional seasons | — | 8 |
| Dominance w25% | 76 | 76 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 84 | 74 |
| Honours w20% | 74 | 80 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 82 |
Gao "Tian" Tian-Liang leads with a GOAT score of 80.5 against 80.4 for Sean "seang@res" Gares — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
seang@res scores higher on statistics, longevity. Tian leads on peak, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. seang@res: 80.4, Tian: 80.5.
Make your case for seang@res vs Tian. 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.