In part one of this interview Wiktor 'TaZ' Wojtas addressed his career from its earliest points up until his team's second ESWC title in 2008. Now, in the final part, he talks about his team's second WCG gold medal campaign, including their victories over a fnatic team which at times in 2009 has looked unbeatable. With two ESWC titles, two WCG golds and over $360,000 in prize winnings to their name TaZ weighs up the Polish team's place in history amongst the greatest teams.

ESWC was widely considered to be the most difficult of the events to win due to its structure and fields which were always compromised of the best teams of each year. Yet no team ever won two ESWC finals except for PGS/MYM, so can you pinpoint anything specific about your team as to why you were able to accomplish that feat? Do you feel as though modern day tournaments like the IEM Global Finals compare in terms of difficulty?

I don't know why it was us who won it twice, really no idea. It feels more like we won it only once since we never got the winnings from the 2nd one :) but we always had some special preparations before that event, like a bootcamp or we just played a lot to get ready for it. I think that first ESWC was on the same level as the Extreme Masters is nowadays, but I don't really like the group play system in Extreme Masters. So I would still say that ESWC was harder, also because we won it ;D

Looking at your accomplishments list one could describe that era of PGS/MYM as a team designed to win major events. Whereas other top teams would tend to find a consistent level and play at or around that level yours seemed to either flop too early in a tournament or come together and win it entirely. Both in terms of prize money and event stature your team won the right events at the right times in history. Meanwhile a team like the pre-2009 fnatic won a number of events but they tended to be the smaller ones and then their 2nds or 3rds would be in the major events. Do you have any insights you can offer on this topic?

I think that at least at the beginning, it was win or "die" situation because we couldn't attend all the events we wanted to and we trained hard for the big events only. I mean we practised all the time, but those events had something "extra" which always gave us this 200% motivation to get better before them. I think that our team just needs some stability, sometimes it feels like we are the only top team with so many problems, and hard times. We also rally on our emotions, we can play good being quiet etc. but when you see us jumping, screaming and smiling this is the sign that we will play two times better than usually. We had some tough moments lately and we just didn't have the feeling to free our emotions, but if we are able to do it, we are playing pretty good.

Two WCG golds and two ESWC titles are firsts in Counter-Strike history, discounting Condition Zero and Source, so would people be accurate in calling this team the greatest of all time? How would you weigh your team against the other established greats such as fnatic, mTw.dk or SK.swe?

That's a hard question... but I think that our time is not over yet (we have the same lineup from 2006) so we can still acomplish so much more. That's why I also don't want to get into any debate. There is only one thing I would like to point out: when you look at fnatic, mTw.dk, SK.swe and us, we managed to stay on top for four consecutive years, with same line-up (2006-till now) We also managed to win a major title each year, and I dare to say that ESWC and WCG were always the most important tournaments of the year. I just hope that when we will decide to step down from gaming, we will be up there with all the best teams in Counter-Strike history, because I think that through all these years we have worked hard to gain that respect.

Both of your WCG golds came over the favourites for the event: NiP in 2006 and fnatic in 2009. Your 2006 win came with many people unsure how good you were due to the WSVG London victory beforehand being over a hoorai team who themselves were not established as elites yet. The 2009 victory came on the heels of a shaky IEM IV Dubai campaign. How can you compare the two victories in terms of all of these kinds of circumstances and how the team itself was confidence-wise going into the event? Also what can you say about scoring a victory over fnatic at this year's WCG?

The main difference is that when we came to play in 2006, we had no idea how good the other teams were, I mean we didn't care about it and we just tried as hard as we could to win each round. After some of our biggest wins we lost motivation to bring up new ideas, new tactics. When we went to the Dubai event, we were confident that we were in good form, but yet again we basically ignored the tactical side. After this tournament we knew that one thing we lacked was new tactics, With new tactics people are more eager to play, and it gives you a lot more confidence in your game. So basically when we came to this WCG (2009) we knew that we were prepared much better than for Dubai, and we were confident to on 4 of the 5 maps. Another thing was that this WCG was a lot harder to win than in 2006, the level is going up all the time and it's harder with each event to stay at very top.

As for the win vs. fnatic, we knew that we could beat them, and such a win gives us a big boost of confidence for future tournaments, something we were missing for a long time now, so I just hope that with this win the new cycle will start.

fnatic looked to have taken control on nuke in the final but in a post-match interview LUq said your team decided to throw the tactics out of the window and play a free-for-all style with each player doing what he felt was best at that moment. Is that something you've employed in the past during tough situations? Also was it purely disorganized or was there some basic structure to it? Who sparked the original idea during the match?

I wouldn't say that fnatic were in control, it's normal that sometimes your tactics just hit a wall and you need to adapt, so we came with idea that we should challange them in 1on1 fights, and try to pick them off. We were using such tactics back in the past, but when you play like this you need to be very confident in your moves, if not you will end up as easy frag. We were lucky to be in form that day, and hopefully with this WCG 2009 win, we will keep it up.

[As far as who thought up the 'no tactics' idea] I don't know, one of the guys just came up with the idea to try to pick them off, instead of playing some set rounds. We did plan it a bit before the round, like where we will attack etc. but the outcome was totally dependant on if we would kill or get killed. I think that by changing our style a bit we made fnatic change their style of defending, and in the end we were able to use the tactics which we liked most.

Each of the great CS teams has different strengths in different areas and one of the strengths of your team seems to be playing on the offensive side of maps. What do you think makes your team so good at this aspect of the game and why do you think this group of guys is able to reach a level few other teams have ever been able to consistently reach? In light of your team's aptitude in that area which opposing teams do you think have been best able to weather the storm when your offensive game has been fully on?

To be honest, our T side depends on how hard we have developed new tactics or new plays. Sometimes when we do tactics, one tactic may even take 30 to 40 minutes of debates regarding few grenades. I do also think that a lot depends on timing, when we play a lot we get into a good rhythm and we understand each other very well, especially in those close rounds, maybe it's because we have played with each other for so long. We always feel very strong and confident in our T side, and we lack confidence in our CT side :)

I think that mTw.dk and the old SK with tentpole were playing the best defense. mTw.dk always had good teamwork, they were able to do quick and deadly rotations which usually took it to close rounds like 1vs1 or 2vs2 etc. When it comes to SK, Tentpole was always finding good spots to pick us from, and it felt like that guy was holding off our attacks on his own sometimes, thanks to him other SK players were able to focus on other targets, knowing that their back was safe.

Since the last place finishers at the SuperCup took home $2,000 and it was located in Germany it seems reasonable to assume your team would have attended regardless of not having an organization if an invitation had been granted. What do you think of mouz being invited instead despite the fact all of their ESL accomplishments were from 2008 whereas your team had placed 3rd at the IEM III European finals and 2nd at the Global Finals in 2009?

Well basically from what we know it's that we were to low in ESL ranking. One can only imagine how this was this possible after our strong performance at the ESL Extreme Masters. The lack of organization really hurts us, because tournaments didn't really know if they should invite us, it's harder to contact us and we have to fight for new points in the G7 ranking all the time... at this time we should be like 2nd or 3rd in it, if all points from whole year would count for our team.

From all of your team's organizational problems some people seem to pin-point your decision to decline the Power Gaming deal at the last minute and go with Wicked as a defining moment for the team, especially since the Power Gaming organization is still going strong. What factors are outsiders not seeing leading them to suggest your team merely goes to the highest bidder regardless of an organization's stability?

Well obviously we should regret our decision, but would there be any point in such thinking? At that time we really didn't have any other choice, and imagine that the Wicked offer was good, but not great. When you try to look at it from the bright side we only missed on one tournament (IEM Chengdu), the future will tell if we will miss the next three. It's a pity that, after our win at WCG, we are in such great shape and have no guarantee that we will attend any other events. People need to realise that we really love the game, we love the competition, but we are also in the same position as everyone else: we need to earn money in order to be able to live, pay for an internet connection, for a home etc.

The WCG victory marked the second time this year your team has beaten the 'new' fnatic lineup, the first being in the lower bracket at the IEM III European Finals on train. Many teams have struggled to figure out how to beat fnatic in playoff games this year so what specific qualities do you think a team needs to have to accomplish the task? Did you see anything in mouz's victory against them at the SuperCup which relates?

Well about SuperCup, fnatic were celebrating after awards ceremony, and I think, that that was the only reason they played so badly. When I look at the fantic team I see the same qualities as I can see in our team. Other factors might be that when you put f0rest vs. neo, in top form, neo will still make the best of it. The thing about fnatic is that they always play till the last round, so you must be ready for 30 or more rounds of tough game. You just can't make too many mistakes against these guys, because they will use every one of them.

Can you explain the period in November of 2008 which saw LUq leave the team for a week only to return and kuben be removed for pionas? Also with the incredible success of this specific lineup of five can you point to anything that makes it work so well? Were one of you to retire are there other players within the Polish scene who could be brought in with whom the team could get to the same level?

We were playing really badly during that time, and we had some issues in the team. We also thought that pionas would be a good fit for our team, but in the end despite his great attitude it just wasn't enough for us. When I look back it really helped our team, when we came back with the old lineup all the guys seemed really pumped up and ready. I think that after such a long time it's just easier for us to work as a team, and we know what it takes to achieve success. We have a lot of talented players in Poland, I'm sure that you saw the FX-mix games in the Extreme Masters, in my opinion they really played some good games.

With your victory a game which might be overlooked at the WCG was your quarter-final matchup with Power Gaming which was very close, them taking the second map thanks to some tough 1v2/1v3 situations and then going up 11:4 on you in the first half of the third map. What did you think of that series and how did it compare with the one against the Russians you played in the semi-finals?

I think that they are a very good team, but they just seem to struggle against us. Still we felt like we gave away many rounds, and after train it was hard for us to focus. When they got an 11:4 half time lead we had some thoughts that it may be our last game, but we got our heads up and just focused on that one half. Both games were also really hard, because in both games we had already started to think about our next opponents. We underestimated great teams and it almost cost us our WCG campaign... a lesson which we will learn from in future.

(Photographs copyright of readmore, zotob and fragbite)