EAC vs megoshort — CounterQuant

T3 BO3 CS2 2026-05-21

EAC

1 : 2

megoshort wins

megoshort Winner

CQ GESUS

Models →

No CQ-GESUS predictions available for this match.

MIRAGE · Per-Map Win Rates

Historical results — all recorded matches on each map

MIRAGE model →

Map	EAC	vs	megoshort	Edge
mirage	0% (0/3)		42% (14/33)	-42pp
inferno	0% (0/1)		39% (7/18)	-39pp
ancient	20% (1/5)		42% (16/38)	-22pp
nuke	20% (1/5)		0% (0/5)	+20pp
dust2	—	·	26% (6/23)
anubis	—	·	100% (2/2)
overpass	50% (3/6)		50% (4/8)	0pp
vertigo	—	·	0% (0/1)

Win rates from all recorded CS2 results in the CQ database. Edge = team1 win rate − team2 win rate on this map. Large edges (>10pp) signal map specialists.

MIRAGE · Veto Forecast + Map Win Probabilities

BO3 ban/pick simulation · each team bans worst maps, picks best

MIRAGE model →

Predicted BO3 Veto Sequence

EAC bans

mirage 0% WR

ancient 20% WR

megoshort bans

nuke 0% WR

overpass 50% WR

EAC pick

dust2

Decider

anubis

Decider

vertigo

megoshort pick

inferno

100% — megoshort favored

Per-Map Win Probability — If This Map Is Played

mirage

100%

megoshort

inferno

100%

megoshort

ancient

32%

68%

megoshort

nuke

100%

EAC

overpass

50%

even

EAC on left · megoshort on right · Win prob = each team's historical WR normalised head-to-head on that map · Veto simulates BO3: team bans 2 worst, picks best remaining

Side

Player	K	D	A	HS%	ADR	KAST	Rating	CQR
EAC
MVP anber ENTRY	56	50	15	66%	85.8	67.1%	1.15	4.2
n1Xen RIFLER	52	47	14	50%	77.8	72.6%	1.13	6.0
Maze RIFLER	50	53	21	46%	78.5	71.2%	1.07	5.5
bekker AWP	50	48	13	30%	66.8	69.9%	1.04	5.9
sSen RIFLER	46	50	19	50%	75.4	69.9%	1.02	5.9
megoshort WIN
MVP mogv ENTRY	63	55	15	63%	92.3	67.1%	1.21	2.7
virree	58	54	15	59%	81.9	65.8%	1.12	—
Twinkey ENTRY	51	52	18	51%	71.4	68.5%	1.04	2.4
zen--	44	45	8	36%	64.3	63.0%	0.93	—
robiin SUPPORT	36	55	23	53%	61.1	60.3%	0.75	2.4

Player	K	D	A	HS%	ADR	KAST	Rating	CQR
EAC WIN
n1Xen7	22	10	5	55%	109.7	84.2%	1.77	6.0
anber	15	10	6	80%	93.6	68.4%	1.29	4.2
MazeCS	17	14	4	35%	94.0	63.2%	1.23	5.5
sSen	11	11	3	64%	65.1	68.4%	0.98	5.9
bekker	6	10	3	50%	37.7	73.7%	0.73	5.9
megoshort
virree	17	16	4	53%	85.3	57.9%	1.10	—
Twinkeey	9	13	7	44%	60.6	68.4%	0.84	2.4
mogv	11	14	4	55%	62.5	57.9%	0.81	2.7
zen--	10	13	2	50%	61.1	52.6%	0.74	—
robiin	7	15	7	43%	47.7	57.9%	0.57	2.4

Player	K	D	A	HS%	ADR	KAST	Rating	CQR
EAC
bekker	21	17	4	29%	89.4	78.3%	1.33	5.9
anber	19	16	3	58%	87.4	69.6%	1.21	4.2
MazeCS	16	17	6	63%	86.2	69.6%	1.08	5.5
n1Xen7	11	14	4	36%	56.0	69.6%	0.86	6.0
sSen	11	16	4	64%	64.8	60.9%	0.77	5.9
megoshort WIN
Twinkeey	23	17	4	57%	90.3	73.9%	1.38	2.4
zen--	16	13	2	19%	69.8	69.6%	1.10	—
virree	16	15	4	56%	71.0	65.2%	1.04	—
robiin	13	17	6	62%	68.3	65.2%	0.88	2.4
mogv	14	18	5	43%	67.4	56.5%	0.82	2.7

Player	K	D	A	HS%	ADR	KAST	Rating	CQR
EAC
sSen	24	23	12	38%	89.7	77.4%	1.23	5.9
bekker	23	21	6	26%	67.8	61.3%	1.03	5.9
anber	22	24	6	64%	79.8	64.5%	1.01	4.2
MazeCS	17	22	11	41%	63.3	77.4%	0.96	5.5
n1Xen7	19	23	5	53%	74.4	67.7%	0.94	6.0
megoshort WIN
mogv	38	23	6	74%	129.0	80.7%	1.75	2.7
virree	25	23	7	64%	87.9	71.0%	1.19	—
zen--	18	19	4	44%	62.2	64.5%	0.92	—
Twinkeey	19	22	7	47%	64.0	64.5%	0.91	2.4
robiin	16	23	10	50%	64.1	58.1%	0.77	2.4

Teams

Players in this match

mogv anber n1Xen virree Maze bekker Twinkey sSen zen-- robiin