0 Comments
Teams advantage
Score
6.2
5.9
Inferno0.3
Win Rounds
16
14
Inferno2
Kills
112
95
Inferno17
Damage
11.75K
10.87K
Inferno873
Economy
684.7K
636.6K
Inferno48100
Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Mirage
P
79%
Dust II
67%
Anubis
67%
Ancient
64%
Inferno
P
59%
Overpass
59%
Vertigo
48%
Nuke
43%
Last 5 maps
Mirage
100%
1
0
Dust II
0%
0
0
Anubis
0%
0
0
Ancient
0%
2
0
Inferno
100%
1
0
Overpass
0%
0
0
Vertigo
0%
0
0
Nuke
0%
0
0
Last 5 maps
Mirage
21%
14
45
Dust II
67%
3
7
Anubis
67%
3
29
Ancient
64%
22
27
Inferno
41%
49
3
Overpass
59%
34
4
Vertigo
48%
44
4
Nuke
43%
21
18
Info
Match analysis of POLET vs MASONIC by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between POLET and MASONIC, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 1-0, on the following maps: Inferno, and victory was secured by POLET. The MVP of this match was j3nsyy.
POLET analytics
The team POLET secured 16 out of 30 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Inferno. They also successfully set 2 bombs during the match.
The standout players for POLET were ROBO contributed 26 kills and FL4MUS contributed 26 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 11747 overall damage.
On the defensive side, POLET held their ground firmly, successfully defending 12 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
MASONIC analytics
The team MASONIC managed to secure 14 out of 30 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 MASONIC were j3nsyy contributed 27 kills and fr0slev contributed 19 kills. 10874 of total damage by MASONIC could not prevent POLET from securing the victory
On the defensive side, MASONIC struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 11 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments