0 Comments
Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
Smoke thrown on a map
2315.0371
M4A1 kills on a map
164.6963
M4A1 damage (avg/round)
69.216.7
M4A1 kills on a map
154.6963
M4A1 damage (avg/round)
57.216.7
Player score (round)
35301012
Clutch (opponents)
2
Clutch (opponents)
2
Flash duration on a round (sec)
00:16s00:05s
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Overpass
67%
Vertigo
67%
Nuke
48%
Mirage
42%
Inferno
28%
Ancient
10%
Dust II
5%
Last 5 maps
Overpass
0%
4
4
Vertigo
67%
3
10
Nuke
31%
13
5
Mirage
20%
5
20
Inferno
27%
11
10
Ancient
44%
9
1
Dust II
80%
5
6
Last 5 maps
Overpass
67%
12
10
Vertigo
0%
1
33
Nuke
79%
29
3
Mirage
62%
13
2
Inferno
55%
11
8
Ancient
54%
13
15
Dust II
75%
8
14
Info
Match analysis of MIBR vs 9z by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between MIBR and 9z, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 0-1, on the following maps: Nuke, and victory was secured by 9z. The MVP of this match was max.
9z analytics
The team 9z secured 16 out of 23 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Nuke. They also successfully set 2 bombs during the match.
The standout players for 9z were max contributed 26 kills and dgt contributed 21 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 9837 overall damage.
On the defensive side, 9z held their ground firmly, successfully defending 11 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
MIBR analytics
The team MIBR managed to secure 7 out of 23 rounds, but faced challenges in adapting to their opponent's strategies. Capturing 1 plants during the match did not lead the team to victory.
The standout players for MIBR were JOTA contributed 10 kills and exit contributed 11 kills. 6779 of total damage by MIBR could not prevent 9z from securing the victory
On the defensive side, MIBR struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 3 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments