100 Thieves vs STATE — CounterQuant

T3 BO3 CS2 2026-05-24

100 Thieves

0 : 2

STATE wins

STATE 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	100 Thieves	vs	STATE	Edge
ancient	68% (15/22)		39% (7/18)	+29pp
inferno	72% (18/25)		44% (8/18)	+28pp
mirage	50% (7/14)		29% (5/17)	+21pp
anubis	40% (2/5)		20% (1/5)	+20pp
nuke	62% (15/24)		70% (14/20)	-8pp
overpass	67% (2/3)		61% (11/18)	+6pp
dust2	73% (19/26)	·	—
vertigo	50% (5/10)	·	—

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

100 Thieves bans

anubis 40% WR

nuke 62% WR

STATE bans

mirage 29% WR

ancient 39% WR

100 Thieves pick

inferno

62% — 100 Thieves favored

Decider

dust2

Decider

vertigo

STATE pick

overpass

48% — STATE favored

Per-Map Win Probability — If This Map Is Played

ancient

64%

36%

100 Thieves

inferno

62%

38%

100 Thieves

mirage

63%

37%

100 Thieves

anubis

67%

33%

100 Thieves

nuke

47%

53%

even

overpass

52%

48%

even

100 Thieves on left · STATE 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
100 Thieves
MVP device	45	29	18	36%	108.9	82.6%	1.56	—
poiii RIFLER	35	30	10	40%	86.8	69.6%	1.18	8.0
Ag1l RIFLER	27	31	14	37%	63.9	69.6%	0.95	7.8
rain ENTRY	22	31	10	45%	51.9	65.2%	0.78	7.5
sirah RIFLER	21	33	3	67%	53.9	52.2%	0.63	7.9
STATE WIN
MVP sL1m3 AWP	48	28	7	35%	104.3	69.6%	1.50	5.4
Zanto RIFLER	31	33	13	52%	74.8	73.9%	1.07	4.9
thamlike SUPPORT	26	26	8	46%	55.1	78.3%	1.01	5.1
kwezz RIFLER	28	34	14	71%	81.4	65.2%	0.96	5.1
Patti ENTRY	22	32	7	64%	55.2	60.9%	0.74	3.6

Player	K	D	A	HS%	ADR	KAST	Rating	CQR
100 Thieves
device	20	16	11	50%	111.4	86.4%	1.50	—
rain	11	15	6	55%	65.7	68.2%	0.87	7.5
ag1L	12	16	4	25%	59.6	68.2%	0.85	7.8
poiii	10	15	5	40%	55.0	50.0%	0.65	8.0
sirah	10	15	1	80%	58.7	50.0%	0.65	7.9
STATE WIN
sL1m3	25	13	3	32%	111.0	72.7%	1.63	5.4
Zanto	16	14	7	56%	70.1	72.7%	1.14	4.9
kwezz	14	15	9	64%	83.7	72.7%	1.09	5.1
Patti	14	13	2	64%	71.6	72.7%	1.07	3.6
thamlike	8	10	5	38%	39.2	81.8%	0.88	5.1

Player	K	D	A	HS%	ADR	KAST	Rating	CQR
100 Thieves
poiii	25	15	5	40%	116.0	87.5%	1.66	8.0
device	25	13	7	24%	106.6	79.2%	1.62	—
ag1L	15	15	10	47%	67.8	70.8%	1.04	7.8
rain	11	16	4	36%	39.3	62.5%	0.70	7.5
sirah	11	18	2	55%	49.6	54.2%	0.62	7.9
STATE WIN
sL1m3	23	15	4	39%	98.2	66.7%	1.37	5.4
thamlike	18	16	3	50%	69.6	75.0%	1.14	5.1
Zanto	15	19	6	47%	79.0	75.0%	1.01	4.9
kwezz	14	19	5	79%	79.3	58.3%	0.84	5.1
Patti	8	19	5	63%	40.0	50.0%	0.44	3.6

Teams

Players in this match

device sL1m3 poiii Zanto thamlike kwezz Ag1l rain Patti sirah