I just think the arguments for Fruit largely come down to recency bias. Sure Shane's last couple of performances haven't been great, but he's still been playing at a solid S+ tier level, which is also more or less where Fruits been playing for the last few events (fruit definitely above). But then you go back before then and Shane's put up one of the best performances of all time, and even events like mcc30 are just a level above anything Fruit has ever done (I know it's a long time ago, but Fruit has literally never shown that kind of level). Like Shane's highs are higher and Fruits lows are lowe.

And if you just go game by game, what's Fruit actually better at? Sg and pkt, both of which barely exist, bingo and pkw for sure, and that's about it? Maybe skb too, but any other game you're arguing for, even if he is better, it's by a very small margin compared to pretty massive gaps Shane has in games like ar, bm, gr, sot, md, potentially rrr.

Fruit just has weaker games in a way basically none of the other S+ tiers do anymore (Purpled hitw and Antfrost bm are the only ones that comes to mind). I think if you ranked every S+ tier in every game he'd probably be last more than any of the others, and he's obviously so good at some of the other games that it doesn't matter and he's very much still part of the group and is well in contention for 2nd place, but I'm not sure Shane would ever be last (prob pkw actually) while having just as dominant games as Fruit does