“If you don’t have trouble communicating but you’re not top-1, you do have a communication problem”. Cloud9 analyst on mentality, interz swap and Comeback9 memeExclusive

Ahead of IEM Katowice 2023, we sat down with Ivan «F_1N» Kochugov, the strategic mind behind Cloud9’s analytical operations and former Gambit head coach. He established the foundational Gambit Youngsters lineup and partnered with Konstantin «Groove» Pikiner to guide the squad to world number one status.

Our conversation explored not just F_1N’s pre-Gambit career trajectory (where he transitioned from being a Counter-Strike 1.6 legend in Russia to working hospitality jobs), but also contemporary Cloud9 operational challenges: communication dynamics, consistent comeback capabilities, and psychological support requirements.

— Your competitive history includes significant 1.6 tournament victories, followed by years away from professional gaming. What occupied that interim period?

— During that transitional phase, I completely stepped away from competitive gaming and professional play. The majority of my time involved working bar and restaurant positions.

During one Moscow visit, Zeus visited my workplace and proposed I become pro100’s strategic coach. My initial reaction was skepticism: “Coaching? I’ve been disconnected from the scene for six years – it’s fundamentally different now!” His persuasive argument centered on potential unfinished business in my competitive career.

My Counter-Strike 1.6 departure carried negative emotional weight: my competitive trajectory had stagnated, I developed unhealthy result fixation, and experienced general career disillusionment. Perhaps abandoning the game then was premature… However, I maintain no regrets about my decisions.

— Counter-Strike’s evolution from then to now – completely separate competitive ecosystems?

— Not at all, the core competitive framework remains identical. Counter-Strike maintains consistent strategic principles regardless of version designation. The primary distinction involves scale expansion and global competitive infrastructure development.

The essential competitive DNA persists unchanged: teams still field five competitors, rounds must still be won through tactical execution, and objective completion remains paramount. Many competitive map geometries retained their foundational layouts. Dust 2 preserves remarkable similarity to legacy versions: identical rotational pathways and established positional advantages. The strategic approach mirrors what we executed in 1.6 or Source iterations.

— Describe your respective competitive roles alongside Groove during the 1.6 era.

— Groove functioned as primary captain and strategic coach, overseeing comprehensive team development processes: meta-strategic adaptation, round-specific tactical planning, and situational response protocols. I operated as standard rifler, frequently assuming positions that teammates found strategically challenging. I became the roster’s utility player: testing every competitive position and fulfilling diverse in-game responsibilities.

— Your brief competitive stint with forZe.Forever Young in CS:GO – what characterized that experience?

— We attempted competitive revitalization with veteran players, essentially testing legacy competitive viability. Results demonstrated immediate high-level delivery impossibility, and organizations showed limited patience for gradual development projects.

Following this unsuccessful venture, I returned to hospitality employment. There I reconnected with Groove and initiated Gambit’s academy development program. I financed computer equipment through credit arrangements, while B1ad3 facilitated Faceit Pro League invitation access. I competed using the alias MexicanJesus: nobody comprehended my competitive identity, background, or league qualification pathway.

At the establishment, I reduced weekend and evening shift commitments, primarily working daytime schedules – this reduced income but enabled FACEIT participation and talent identification activities. My belief in the project’s potential never wavered, and the investment ultimately proved successful. I maintained absolute conviction throughout the development process.

— HLTV records show only two CS:GO matches with statistically poor performances. Was FPL competition particularly challenging during that developmental phase?

— Critical context involves our Inferno match selections, where both encounters began with offensive halves featuring my lurking responsibilities. Both matches featured critical ramp control failures, creating frequent disadvantageous numerical situations. Under those competitive circumstances, statistical excellence becomes mathematically improbable. (laughs)

Mechanical shooting proficiency no longer represented my primary competitive attribute during that period. However, practice sessions occasionally demonstrated competitive form. We even secured victory against Valiance featuring nexa and huNter-, where on Cobblestone I achieved 28 eliminations. During select scrimmage sessions, I experienced competitive moments without perceiving opponent resistance.

However, competitive analysis clearly indicated mechanical adaptation requirements. FACEIT competition represented different strategic environments: participants frequently designated me as primary in-game leader. The competitive community recognized: selecting MexicanJesus on Train guaranteed straightforward victory. (laughs)

— Your subsequent Groove reconnection and academy project discussion…

— This occurred following Krakow Major, celebrating team member birthdays at the establishment. There we initially conceptualized Gambit academy roster development.

During spring sessions, I reconvened with Groove – he expressed initial project reluctance due to previous academy initiative negative associations. I defended my strategic perspective: the organization maintained thirty-plus player rosters requiring future competitive refreshment. My coaching background included pro100 experience, I had reintegrated into competitive environments, and demonstrated readiness for comprehensive roster development commitment.

— What strategic contribution did B1ad3 provide while coaching the primary roster?

— His responsibilities focused exclusively on main roster development. During autumn 2018, I compiled primary CIS competitive prospect lists, when Groove contacted me asking: “Strategic assessment regarding Ax1Le consideration? We intend main roster acquisition.” I confirmed Sergey represented essential signing consideration given his exceptional developmental potential.

— Identify the foundational roster composition.

— My initial strategic vision identified Sh1ro as roster cornerstone, alongside Supra and Nafany. Dmitry [Sh1ro] and Vladislav [Nafany] maintained extensive prior competitive partnership, demonstrating established strategic synergy. Tr3vl completed testing phase qualification, while Winter participated in three-day bootcamp evaluation. Ultimately, we determined Interz represented superior strategic selection.

— Sh1ro reportedly ignored initial recruitment outreach.

— That represents characteristic Sh1ro behavioral patterns, his developmental personality trait. Sweetypotz [team management] invested significant effort persuading both him and parental figures. Initial assessment clearly identified Sh1ro as primary AWPer around whom teams could construct competitive frameworks. However, during that developmental period, he lacked professional competitive commitment certainty.

— Sweetypotz indicated approximately thirty competitors reached final selection stages – which currently compete at tier-one level?

— Several individuals subsequently competed for DreamEaters, while we additionally evaluated Krad and forester. Supra and tr3vl demonstrated exceptional mechanical proficiency – I assigned them primary star-player competitive responsibilities, nafany operated as captain – he demonstrated effective in-game leadership and strategic engagement. This roster configuration required strong positional anchor – interz.

— Strategic exclusion of Ax1Le from initial Youngsters consideration – what informed that decision?

— Organizational planning centered on constructing new primary roster around him following legacy roster dissolution. Originally we considered Porya, however documentation complications prevented participation, so we substituted Ax1Le for inaugural tournament participation. He delivered exceptional competitive performance, generating strategic consideration: pause primary roster development, integrate Ax1Le into academy competitive environment.

— Describe your mentoring approach intensity level.

— The disciplinary authority figure, certainly. Significant distinction exists between elite competitor collaboration and developmental player coaching. Young competitors frequently lack discipline appreciation and strategic importance comprehension. Therefore, strict enforcement becomes essential training process component.

Certainly, recreational competitive environments remain possible. However, competitive results will reflect that strategic approach. At Youngsters, every participant committed to intensive development and competitive success pursuit.

— Youngsters implemented exclusive training programs featuring performance milestones developed collaboratively with Konstantin – what comprised these systems?

— Specific operational details remain confidential, however milestone failure triggered contractual consequences. (laughs) Program extensions represented potential outcomes. Repeated failure activated extensive disciplinary protocols.

The comprehensive program foundation incorporates Groove’s and my competitive experience. Currently, players implement these systems according to individual form restoration requirements. The competitors achieved professional independence, understanding necessary development activities and timing requirements. This represents competitive professionalism: players comprehend necessary development activities and execution methods to achieve competitive form, recognizing performance deviation indicators. Training, practice, and analytical activities consume 8-10 daily hours.

— Groove’s involvement level in youth team operations from inception, or reduced participation pre-pandemic?

— Pre-pandemic operations featured his regular training session attendance and team meeting facilitation, plus nearly all LAN tournament participation. Teams acquire essential competitive experience during LAN environments, and Konstantin consistently provided strategic presence during critical competitive moments.

Subsequently, his available time increased, while competitive results demonstrated performance decline. Therefore I requested increased involvement, he initiated regular training and practice session participation. The team received summer RMR evaluation period: either demonstrate competitive progress indicators, or implement strategic adjustments. Progress absence triggered replacement decisions and mature competitor recruitment initiatives. That’s how we integrated Hobbit. Subsequent competitive history represents established record.

— Identify fundamental strategic vision differences between your CS philosophy and Groove’s approach.

— Training process methodologies demonstrate complete alignment. Nafany accurately observed: “You both articulate strategic concepts differently, but core principles remain identical.” Primary distinctions emerge during competitive matches: I demonstrate emotional engagement, Groove maintains calm professional demeanor. (laughs) Different temperament characteristics. All competitive sports demonstrate similar patterns: certain competitors maintain emotional engagement throughout competitions, others demonstrate composed strategic presence.

Who is donk? What we know about Spirit Academy 15-year old prodigy invited to FPL, his crosshair, settings, and config
Is he the next m0NESY?

— Define core philosophical tenets underlying your (and Groove’s) CS competitive approach.

— Comprehensive philosophical exploration remains restricted… essential components include intensive work commitment and mutual support during competitive challenges (laughs).

Fundamentally, developmental background and life experience significantly influence competitive approach. Childhood influences and competitive entry pathways shape strategic development. Consider m0NESY and Sh1ro: they demonstrated competitive championship ambition from early developmental stages. Contrasting competitors initiate competitive engagement at sixteen, achieving professional competitive realization at twenty.

— Your perspective regarding Cloud9 characterization as strategically suffocating team: excessive caution without offensive aggression?

— That represents functional competitive strategy: opponents should experience strategic discomfort during engagements. Implementation methodology varies, but competitive results represent ultimate measurement criteria.

Competitive landscape includes FURIA, maintaining constant offensive pressure, alongside NAVI, who prevent strategic breathing room, etc. Fast-paced teams, or “scripted” strategic approaches, or default tactical systems – all aim to create opponent strategic discomfort.

For example, FURIA executes “arcade” CS defensive strategies exceptionally well – that creates offensive phase difficulties. However, nobody identifies this strategic approach as suffocating CS. Nevertheless, strategic objectives remain identical – make opponent competitive engagement impossible.

— Strategic preference for permanent bootcamp operational format – what drives this methodology?

— This represented Youngsters operational framework during developmental phases. Online information absorption cannot guarantee comprehensive strategic development. Bootcamp environments establish foundational competitive understanding: competitors comprehend training facility dedication and result-oriented work commitment. Full strategic concentration without external distraction. Responsibilities limited to competitive development and personal maintenance activities.

Cloud9 organizational culture embraces pre-championship bootcamp implementation. Additionally, competitors appreciate this operational format, voluntarily participating in collective training environments.

Strategic implementation requires appropriate balance and burnout prevention. Achieving competitive excellence represents significant accomplishment, but maintaining elite status proves more challenging. Continuous competitive engagement becomes essential for maintaining championship contention. Burnout prevention requires strategic focus on individual experience, team communication dynamics, and competitive irritability factors.

Ax1Le is carrying Cloud9 on Rio Major with sh1ro. Did you know he nearly got VAC due to account breach?
Who would have carried Cloud9 then?

— Cloud9 psychological support infrastructure status?

— Our organizational structure includes three experienced professionals fully engaged in training processes, available for comprehensive issue discussion at any time.

— Current psychological support adequacy? Nearly every Cloud9 competitive loss receives analyst attribution to mentality issues.

— External observers lack internal team dynamic comprehension. Certain operational challenges remain beyond organizational control, where issues can accumulate strategic momentum. Competitive complications can emerge regardless of psychological support availability. Additionally, competitors can initiate psychological consultation when recognizing personal requirements.

— However, psychological consultation requires overcoming internal barriers and professional stigma acknowledgment. Organizational provision would simplify access procedures.

— Currently, organizational leadership believes primary competitive challenges cannot resolve through psychological intervention. Training process situations and other factors prevented… Strategic distinction exists between comprehensive preparation failure and competitive execution mistakes. However, operational overload creates additional competitive challenges beyond mechanical execution requirements.

Current competitive focus centers on creating optimal squad conditions. Health complication prevention and bootcamp operational issues represent current priorities. We recognize previous season training limitations and understand maximum preparation obstacles. Multiple contributing factors require strategic attention.

My strategic assessment indicates issues relate to health considerations and lifestyle factors rather than psychological frameworks. Physical conditioning maintenance, appropriate lifestyle management, and similar considerations become essential competitive components.

— Intensive bootcamp scheduling – does this create interpersonal conflicts?

— Certainly, conflict situations emerged. During 2021 competitive surge, we achieved elite competitive status while maintaining extremely demanding tournament schedules. We committed to numerous third-party competitions without anticipating comprehensive competitive success. Consequently, we transitioned between tournaments without recovery periods. Excessive invitation volume created operational overload. We recognized strategic load regulation necessity.

— NAVI’s Pradig prepares extensive opponent documentation, while innersh1ne utilizes condensed reporting formats. Describe your analytical methodology.

— My strategic priority involves delivering essential opponent intelligence, fulfilling team strategic requirements.

Analytical methodology depends on coach-analyst partnership operational format. Professional CS lacks standardized coaching education infrastructure. Every strategic professional develops individual operational approaches and analytical styles. Theoretical competitive frameworks await future development.

Esports competitive advantage includes continuous real opponent engagement rather than internal team repetition. Competitive environments feature daily new strategic situations and opponent variations.

However, theoretical competitive frameworks contain significant knowledge gaps. Esports competitors might declare: “Strategic element reduction today, unnecessary competitive component elimination.” Traditional sports maintain comprehensive physical training literature and peak performance methodologies: competitors wouldn’t declare “Today’s crossing practice cancellation, I’ll participate 5×5 sessions and light running”. We must adopt systematic approaches and deepen training process sophistication.

— Professional competitive experience requirement for coaching positions – essential or optional?

— CS coaching represents extremely challenging professional field. Competitive gaming experience remains essential coaching component, otherwise strategic comprehension contains fundamental gaps. Coaching without competitive background represents exceptional circumstances rather than professional standard.

Historical example: LookingForOrg competitor’s parental figure coached during EPL participation. His competitive interest originated through son’s engagement. However, his contribution likely involved motivational support rather than tactical development.

Additional consideration: elite competitors demonstrate limited receptivity toward inexperienced strategic guidance: “Theoretical development without competitive foundation – continue analytical work without strategic communication.” CS competitive history lacks successful team examples where coaches possessed no competitive background. No professional examples exist for developmental guidance.

When assembling the inaugural Gambit Youngsters lineup, we employed a strategic approach to player selection that balanced raw mechanical skill with specific role requirements. The recruitment process identified several promising talents who would later make their mark in the competitive scene, including players who eventually represented DreamEaters, with additional consideration given to Krad and forester.

Our philosophy centered on creating a balanced team composition where each player’s strengths complemented the others. Supra and tr3vl demonstrated exceptional mechanical prowess, earning them designated star-player positions. Meanwhile, nafany assumed captaincy duties, demonstrating strong in-game leadership and genuine enthusiasm for strategic calling. The final piece was identifying a reliable anchor player to stabilize the roster structure, which we found in interz, whose consistent performance provided the defensive foundation the team required.

— What was the reasoning behind initially excluding Ax1Le from the Youngsters lineup?

— The organization had strategic plans to reconstruct the primary roster around Ax1Le following the dissolution of the previous lineup. Initially, Porya was slated for the position, but documentation complications necessitated Ax1Le’s inclusion for the initial tournament appearance. His impressive performance sparked reconsideration: we opted to temporarily pause main roster development and incorporate Ax1Le into the academy program, recognizing his potential to elevate the team’s competitive level.

— How would you characterize your mentorship approach with young players?

— I embraced the role of disciplinary figure, yes. Coaching emerging talent presents fundamentally different challenges compared to working with established professionals. Young competitors often underestimate the critical importance of structured discipline and consistent work habits. Implementing firm guidance becomes an indispensable component of the development pathway.

While creating an enjoyable training environment remains possible, pursuing results demands rigorous standards. At Youngsters, every member committed to intensive effort and dedicated themselves to achieving competitive success.

— Can you elaborate on the specialized training program featuring performance benchmarks that you designed with Konstantin?

— While specific details remain confidential, the program incorporated rigorous performance standards with consequences for underachievement. We maintained a lighthearted approach to discipline, but the framework ensured accountability. Failing to meet established milestones triggered program extensions, while repeated shortcomings activated progressive disciplinary measures.

The entire training methodology drew from our combined professional experiences. Currently, the players independently implement these techniques to regain competitive form. This demonstrates professional maturity: competitors understanding precisely what training methods to employ for peak performance, while recognizing when their gameplay requires adjustment. Combining training sessions, practical exercises, and analytical review, professional players typically dedicate 8-10 hours daily to Counter-Strike development.

— What was Groove’s involvement level with the youth squad before pandemic restrictions?

— During the pre-pandemic period, he participated in select training sessions and conducted team meetings, while also attending nearly all LAN competitions. Teams acquire crucial competitive experience during live events, and Konstantin consistently provided support during these pivotal moments.

As his schedule became more flexible, our competitive results began declining. Consequently, I requested increased involvement, prompting his more frequent participation in our training regimens and practice matches. Management established an evaluation period extending to the summer RMR tournament: either demonstrating gameplay progression or implementing roster adjustments. Without visible improvement, we opted for personnel changes, seeking more experienced competitors. This led to integrating Hobbit. The subsequent developments are well-documented competitive history.

— Do significant philosophical differences exist between your Counter-Strike approach and Groove’s methodology?

— Our training philosophies maintain complete alignment. Nafany accurately observed: “You both articulate concepts differently, but convey identical fundamental principles.” The primary distinctions emerge during competitive matches: I exhibit more emotional engagement, while Groove maintains composed seriousness. Different personality types naturally emerge across all competitive sports: some participants display emotional intensity throughout matches, while others remain calmly seated.

— What fundamental principles define your shared Counter-Strike philosophy?

— While detailed explanations remain restricted, the foundation requires intensive effort and mutual support during challenging situations.

Background and life experiences significantly influence competitive development. Childhood influences and gaming introduction pathways vary dramatically. Consider m0NESY and Sh1ro: both recognized their competitive aspirations from early childhood. Meanwhile, other players discover the game later, only realizing professional potential during their late teenage years.

Professional gaming demands systematic approach to skill development. Understanding class selection strategies can dramatically impact team performance, similar to how role specialization functions in military simulation games.

Our methodology emphasizes creating uncomfortable competitive environments for opponents. Different teams achieve this through varied approaches: aggressive pushing styles, relentless pressure application, or methodical default executions. The objective remains consistent across all approaches: making it exceptionally difficult for adversaries to execute their preferred gameplay patterns.

External observers often misunderstand the internal dynamics of professional esports teams. Many challenges stem from factors beyond immediate control, with minor issues potentially escalating into significant problems rapidly. Unexpected difficulties can emerge regardless of psychological support availability. Players maintain autonomy to seek mental health professionals when they recognize personal needs.

— However, seeking help requires overcoming significant personal barriers and societal stigma. Having organizational support structures makes this process substantially more accessible.

Currently, Cloud9’s management believes core performance issues extend beyond psychological factors alone. Training process complications and other operational constraints have previously limited effectiveness.

When teams execute all planned strategies correctly but still fail due to individual errors, that represents one scenario. However, when operating under severe resource constraints while simultaneously executing complex in-game actions, the challenges multiply exponentially.

This competitive season emphasizes establishing optimal environmental conditions for the roster. Preventing health complications and bootcamp-related problems takes priority. The organization acknowledges training volume limitations from previous seasons and understands the contributing factors to suboptimal preparation.

Performance limitations appear more connected to physical conditioning and lifestyle management than purely psychological factors. Maintaining peak physical condition, implementing proper nutrition, and ensuring adequate recovery become equally crucial as in-game skill development.

— Does an intensive bootcamp schedule inevitably create interpersonal friction?

— Conflicts have certainly occurred. During 2021, the team experienced rapid competitive ascent, resulting in an extremely congested tournament calendar. Pre-commitments to numerous third-party events were made without anticipating championship-level performances. Consequently, the roster transitioned between competitions without adequate recovery periods. Excessive invitation volume created unsustainable competitive demands, necessitating systematic load management implementation.

Professional teams must balance intensive training benefits against potential burnout risks. Extended bootcamp periods facilitate complete focus eliminationg external distractions and domestic responsibilities. This environment fosters maximum concentration on competitive objectives.

Successful organizations recognize the delicate equilibrium between pushing performance boundaries and preserving long-term player welfare. Strategic scheduling now incorporates mandatory recovery windows and psychological decompression periods between major competitions.

— NAVI’s Pradig creates extensive opponent documentation while innersh1ne compiles concise reports for karrigan. How do you structure your analytical work?

— My methodology prioritizes delivering comprehensive opponent intelligence that addresses specific team requirements. Analytical delivery formats depend entirely on coach-analyst collaborative dynamics within each organization.

Esports currently lacks standardized educational pathways for coaching, scouting, or analytical roles. Each professional develops individualized approaches and stylistic preferences. Theoretical frameworks and educational materials remain largely undeveloped within the industry.

Competitive gaming’s structural advantage lies in continuous engagement with diverse opponents rather than repetitive internal training. Each competitive day presents novel strategic challenges and unfamiliar opposition, unlike traditional sports where opponent tendencies become predictable through repeated exposure.

Significant theoretical knowledge gaps persist across the esports ecosystem. Players sometimes arbitrarily decide to reduce focus on certain skills or eliminate others entirely from development priorities. Conventional sports maintain established literature covering physical conditioning, peak performance attainment, and systematic training methodologies—no athlete would declare “I’m skipping crossing drills today for casual 5v5 and light jogging.” Professional Counter-Strike must adopt similar structured development systems while expanding training process sophistication.

— Can individuals without professional playing backgrounds transition into successful coaching roles?

— Counter-Strike coaching presents exceptional difficulty without competitive playing experience. Critical game understanding elements remain inaccessible to those lacking firsthand competitive experience. Coaching without professional background represents statistical outliers rather than viable career paths.

One documented case involved a father coaching his son’s team LookingForOrg during EPL competitions. His involvement originated through familial connection rather than professional ambition. However, his contribution likely focused on motivational support rather than tactical development.

Elite players typically demonstrate resistance toward guidance from non-players: “You develop theoretical frameworks and compile data—continue those activities without attempting to direct my in-game decisions.” Competitive Counter-Strike history contains no documented successful teams led by coaches lacking competitive backgrounds. No established career trajectories exist for aspiring coaches without professional playing credentials.

— What is the current operational status of Cloud9’s academy team?

— The development project currently operates in suspended status. Academy players have transitioned to free agency, with no immediate recruitment initiatives planned. My professional focus has shifted completely to primary roster development and strategic planning.

— Have Gambit and NAVI’s achievements established academy systems as essential organizational components?

— These organizations provide definitive proof demonstrating the necessity of investing in youth development structures.

The Gambit Youngsters success narrative and B1T’s developmental trajectory established aspirational benchmarks for emerging talent. Young competitors observe tangible pathways from obscurity to championship contention: “Incredible! Previously unknown players now compete at the highest levels!” This eliminates skepticism about rapid competitive advancement: “Wait, we’ll become world champions within two years? Stop joking.” Visible success examples generate greater belief in developmental systems than theoretical possibilities alone.

No reproduction without permission：SeeYouSoon Game Club » “If you don’t have trouble communicating but you’re not top-1, you do have a communication problem”. Cloud9 analyst on mentality, interz swap and Comeback9 memeExclusive Is he the next m0NESY?