Records Match
Record/Time/Map
Val/Avg
Set by
Rival
GLOCK kills on a map
41.4398
GLOCK damage (avg/round)
12.43.8
Eco wins full buy
1
Shots (total/round)
8416
Player score (round)
35791012
Shots (total/round)
8316
Damage (total/round)
40073
Player score (round)
34951012
Multikill x-
4
Multikill x-
4
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Mirage
100%
Dust II
56%
Nuke
39%
Overpass
29%
Inferno
11%
Vertigo
10%
Ancient
10%
Last 5 maps
Mirage
0%
0
53
Dust II
56%
16
15
Nuke
64%
22
0
Overpass
38%
13
24
Inferno
48%
25
12
Vertigo
50%
20
8
Ancient
63%
24
4
Last 5 maps
Mirage
100%
3
10
Dust II
0%
1
7
Nuke
25%
8
6
Overpass
67%
6
3
Inferno
37%
19
4
Vertigo
40%
5
10
Ancient
53%
17
0
Info
Match analysis of SAW vs VELOX by the Bo3.gg Team
In the CS2 match between SAW and VELOX, a series of thrilling battles unfolded with a score of 1-0, on the following maps: Inferno, and victory was secured by SAW. The MVP of this match was MUTiRiS.
SAW analytics
The team SAW secured 8 out of 13 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations. They won on the maps Inferno. They also successfully set 1 bombs during the match.
The standout players for SAW were MUTiRiS contributed 17 kills and arki contributed 15 kills. Their exceptional skills played a pivotal role in securing the win. Thanks to coordinated effort, the team inflicted 5490 overall damage.
On the defensive side, SAW held their ground firmly, successfully defending 3 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control proved to be crucial.
VELOX analytics
The team VELOX managed to secure 5 out of 13 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 VELOX were NaOw contributed 8 kills and TiN contributed 8 kills. 4323 of total damage by VELOX could not prevent SAW from securing the victory
On the defensive side, VELOX struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 1 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments