0 Comments
Teams advantage
Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
Kills on a map
27.9316.7206
Damage (avg/round)
144.11847.8
Damage (total/round)
40073
Player score (round)
43431010
Multikill x-
4
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Mirage
83%
Ancient
56%
Nuke
50%
Vertigo
40%
Inferno
35%
Dust II
3%
Anubis
3%
Last 5 maps
Mirage
0%
0
18
Ancient
56%
18
2
Nuke
50%
10
2
Vertigo
60%
5
7
Inferno
60%
15
5
Dust II
68%
19
0
Anubis
36%
14
2
Last 5 maps
Mirage
83%
6
0
Ancient
0%
1
0
Nuke
100%
1
0
Vertigo
100%
1
0
Inferno
25%
4
0
Dust II
71%
7
0
Anubis
33%
3
0
Last results
Head to head
Past matches
- lwwww
- lwwww
Info
Match analysis of Lynn Vision vs SGGT by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between Lynn Vision and SGGT, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 0-1, on the following maps: Anubis, and victory was secured by SGGT. The MVP of this match was ZinGY.
SGGT analytics
The team SGGT secured 0 out of 0 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Anubis. They also successfully set 0 bombs during the match.
The standout players for SGGT were ZinGY contributed 28 kills and lame contributed 13 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 8028 overall damage.
On the defensive side, SGGT held their ground firmly, successfully defending 0 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
Lynn Vision analytics
The team Lynn Vision managed to secure 0 out of 0 rounds, but faced challenges in adapting to their opponent's strategies. Capturing 0 plants during the match did not lead the team to victory.
The standout players for Lynn Vision were Westmelon contributed 17 kills and flying contributed 12 kills. 5960 of total damage by Lynn Vision could not prevent SGGT from securing the victory
On the defensive side, Lynn Vision struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 0 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments