CS2 Map Specialists

Which tracked professional teams actually perform on each Active Duty map — and, read the other way, the map every one of them is strongest and weakest on. Every win rate is shown next to the number of maps behind it.

24Teams ranked
7Of 7 Active Duty maps
29Teams sampled
5Minimum maps to rank
22With enough rounds for a side split

How these rankings work

A team's raw win rate on a map is unusable at a small sample: play two Nuke games and win both and you read as the best Nuke team alive. So two things happen before anything is ranked. First, a team that has played a map fewer than 5times is left out of that map's table entirely rather than ranked with a caveat. Second, the teams that remain are ordered by an adjusted win rate: their record with 6 imaginary coin-flip maps added to it, which drags a thin record towards 50% and leaves a large one closer to where it started — a 5-0 lands on 72.7% rather than 100%, while 60% over 20 maps only eases to 57.7%. That is the whole method. The raw win rate and the maps played sit in the same row, so you can always see what the adjustment did and disagree with it.

The CT and T columns work differently, on purpose. Rounds are a separate sample from maps played — a map is about twelve rounds per side, so a team that has only just cleared the 5-map threshold has roughly sixty rounds of each side, and the maps gate says nothing about whether that is enough. Those columns have their own minimum of 100 rounds, the point where the margin of error on a near-even rate drops to about five points; under it the cell is a dash. Past it the rate is shown raw, with its round count beside it. It is not put through the adjustment above, because six phantom maps against several hundred rounds would move the number by a fraction of a point while implying a correction had been made — a gate is the honest tool at that sample size, not a prior.

A bare side rate is close to meaningless on its own, because Nuke is CT-sided for everyone. So each side rate is also shown as points above or below that map's pooled ratefor the same side, listed in each map's header. Both the team figure and the baseline are printed, so the subtraction is yours to check. One caveat worth knowing: a team is itself part of the pool its baseline is drawn from — roughly one thirtieth of it — so this is a comparison against the field including itself, not against its opponents.

Pistol rounds are pooled, never shown per map, and that is a deliberate refusal rather than an omission. A map has about two pistol rounds, so even a team with twenty games on one map has only forty pistol rounds there — a margin of error of roughly eight points, wide enough to swallow any difference worth naming. Reaching the same confidence the side columns hold would take fifty games on a single map, which nobody in this sample has. Added up across the whole pool the same team has several hundred pistol rounds, which is a usable sample for the weaker claim actually being made: this team wins pistol rounds, not this team wins pistol rounds here.

Picks and bans are counts of what happened, taken straight from each team's tracked veto record — never inferred from how well a team plays a map. One gap is worth knowing: a map is only counted when the provider carries a line for it, so a team that bans a map in every single veto and therefore never plays it may be missing from that column rather than showing a large number. Picks are not affected, because a map has to be played to have been picked.

Sharpest split in the current sample: ALKA GAMING reads 62.5% adjusted on Inferno over 10 maps, against 25% on Anubis over 6.

Biggest side edges against a map's own baseline: magic on Anubis CT, 58.6% over 128 rounds (+11.6 vs the map); BET-M 33 on Mirage T, 54.4% over 320 rounds (+5.9 vs the map).

Specialists by map

Side rates need 100+ rounds on that side; a dash means the round sample is too thin, not that the team is weak.

Mirage CS2 map

Mirage

Pooled baseline — CT 54.1% over 24,820 rounds · T 48.5% over 25,102 rounds6 more tracked teams sit below the 5-map minimum
#TeamMapsWonRaw winAdjustedCT rdsCT winCT vs mapT rdsT winT vs map
1BET-M 33322268.8%65.8%34559.7%+5.632054.4%+5.9
2Legacy1127466.1%65.3%1,19556.7%+2.61,19052.8%+4.3
3BetBoom Team1579761.8%61.4%1,67755.6%+1.51,73250.9%+2.4
4WW Team613760.7%59.7%57257.9%+3.866250.9%+2.4
5Team Nemesis482960.4%59.2%53255.1%+149548.5%0
6Just Players432660.5%59.2%38159.6%+5.551447.5%-1
7CYBERSHOKE Esports1619559%58.7%1,62755%+0.91,82049.8%+1.3
8 Phantom Academy8562.5%57.1%
9ALKA GAMING12758.3%55.5%13460.4%+6.311543.5%-5
10Entropy472655.3%54.7%44958.6%+4.554943.7%-4.8
11EMPIRE5360%54.5%
12Nemiga25914154.4%54.3%3,27954.5%+0.43,15448.5%0
13magic402255%54.3%41559%+4.948546.2%-2.3
14ReThink11654.5%52.9%13352.6%-1.513147.3%-1.2
15MIBR23512452.8%52.7%2,90053.6%-0.52,88249.1%+0.6
16G225513452.5%52.4%3,26953.4%-0.73,26248.5%0
17OG21611352.3%52.2%2,69452.9%-1.22,72348.7%+0.2
18Vexar12650%50%12449.2%-4.911447.4%-1.1
19FORZE Reload592949.2%49.3%66349.6%-4.556548.5%0
20Zomblers311548.4%48.7%35454.2%+0.128648.3%-0.2
21NIP24911245%45.1%3,23952%-2.13,19445.6%-2.9
22G2 Ares572543.9%44.5%60152.9%-1.265946.3%-2.2
Inferno CS2 map

Inferno

Pooled baseline — CT 51.6% over 21,126 rounds · T 51.2% over 21,075 rounds4 more tracked teams sit below the 5-map minimum
#TeamMapsWonRaw winAdjustedCT rdsCT winCT vs mapT rdsT winT vs map
1Legacy1157767%66.2%1,15155.7%+4.11,33154.1%+2.9
2magic181266.7%62.5%21057.6%+620946.9%-4.3
3ALKA GAMING10770%62.5%11462.3%+10.711242.9%-8.3
4G232720362.1%61.9%4,01354%+2.44,15051.9%+0.7
5Vexar9666.7%60%10860.2%+8.6
6Nemiga26214655.7%55.6%3,21250.7%-0.93,47752%+0.8
7Team Nemesis412356.1%55.3%46452.8%+1.245349.9%-1.3
8MIBR29716354.9%54.8%3,92850.6%-13,46252.5%+1.3
9G2 Ares643554.7%54.3%62152%+0.472251.2%0
10Zomblers281553.6%53%27755.6%+429449.3%-1.9
11BET-M 33281553.6%53%29949.8%-1.833651.8%+0.6
12OG22211250.5%50.5%2,70650.8%-0.82,73850.1%-1.1
13NIP21610749.5%49.5%2,80750.7%-0.92,69949.2%-2
14WW Team251144%45.2%30046.3%-5.324850.4%-0.8
15EMPIRE12541.7%44.5%14848.6%-313147.3%-3.9
16Entropy20840%42.3%25547.8%-3.821849.1%-2.1
17CYBERSHOKE Esports28932.1%35.3%32743.4%-8.227853.2%+2
18ReThink700%23.1%
Dust 2 CS2 map

Dust 2

Pooled baseline — CT 51% over 20,261 rounds · T 50.4% over 19,775 rounds3 more tracked teams sit below the 5-map minimum
#TeamMapsWonRaw winAdjustedCT rdsCT winCT vs mapT rdsT winT vs map
1WW Team774963.6%62.6%74752.5%+1.587354.9%+4.5
2BetBoom Team744662.2%61.3%81154%+376354.1%+3.7
3Legacy885259.1%58.5%92752.5%+1.590353.2%+2.8
4G228116157.3%57.1%3,47752.5%+1.53,58052.5%+2.1
5MIBR1317557.3%57%1,62549.4%-1.61,75052.3%+1.9
6Team Nemesis523057.7%56.9%62251.1%+0.155051.5%+1.1
7magic311858.1%56.8%32354.8%+3.834947.6%-2.8
8ALKA GAMING251456%54.8%24153.5%+2.526849.6%-0.8
9CYBERSHOKE Esports1518053%52.9%1,58151.9%+0.91,59849.6%-0.8
10OG1407452.9%52.8%1,83253.7%+2.71,69648.4%-2
11FORZE Reload894651.7%51.6%1,00251.1%+0.196948.2%-2.2
12Nemiga23311951.1%51.1%2,89448.4%-2.62,71251.6%+1.2
13G2 Ares512651%50.9%61550.7%-0.352748%-2.4
14Zomblers211047.6%48.1%24449.2%-1.825048%-2.4
15Vexar9444.4%46.6%
16Just Players311445.2%46%33551.3%+0.333244%-6.4
17UPGRADE8337.5%42.9%
18BET-M 33391641%42.2%44146.5%-4.536950.7%+0.3
19ReThink11436.4%41.2%12749.6%-1.410240.2%-10.2
20NIP1355339.3%39.8%1,73747.8%-3.21,54446.6%-3.8
21EMPIRE12433.3%38.9%11255.4%+4.413435.8%-14.6
22Entropy23626.1%31%28646.2%-4.826441.7%-8.7
Anubis CS2 map

Anubis

Pooled baseline — CT 47% over 10,162 rounds · T 56.3% over 10,208 rounds5 more tracked teams sit below the 5-map minimum
#TeamMapsWonRaw winAdjustedCT rdsCT winCT vs mapT rdsT winT vs map
1UPGRADE8675%64.3%
2MIBR1288264.1%63.5%1,45846.5%-0.51,45660.6%+4.3
3Nemiga1227763.1%62.5%1,28348.6%+1.61,39058.7%+2.4
4magic151066.7%61.9%12858.6%+11.617459.2%+2.9
5Just Players9666.7%60%11454.4%+7.411050.9%-5.4
6G2 Ares261661.5%59.3%29849.3%+2.329953.8%-2.5
7CYBERSHOKE Esports1317859.5%59.1%1,53746.8%-0.21,33760.1%+3.8
8BetBoom Team985758.2%57.7%1,10044.8%-2.21,07659.7%+3.4
9BET-M 3314857.1%55%15858.2%+11.213147.3%-9
10G2743952.7%52.5%80249.5%+2.586953.5%-2.8
11Legacy683551.5%51.4%74046.1%-0.975056%-0.3
12FORZE Reload261350%50%31746.4%-0.628458.8%+2.5
13Vexar8450%50%10651.9%-4.4
14NIP492346.9%47.2%53543.6%-3.455353.3%-3
15Entropy221045.5%46.5%24251.2%+4.222446%-10.3
16OG642945.3%45.7%72343.4%-3.676653.7%-2.6
17WW Team301240%41.7%34246.5%-0.534648.8%-7.5
18ReThink5120%36.4%
19ALKA GAMING600%25%
Ancient CS2 map

Ancient

Pooled baseline — CT 53.1% over 20,133 rounds · T 50.9% over 20,601 rounds7 more tracked teams sit below the 5-map minimum
#TeamMapsWonRaw winAdjustedCT rdsCT winCT vs mapT rdsT winT vs map
1magic412765.9%63.9%39250%-3.150156.5%+5.6
2MIBR16610160.8%60.4%1,88054.4%+1.32,03252.3%+1.4
3Legacy1217259.5%59.1%1,32954.5%+1.41,26255.1%+4.2
4Just Players332060.6%59%32055.6%+2.539052.6%+1.7
5OG19511559%58.7%2,22855.3%+2.22,41050.7%-0.2
6G21468658.9%58.5%1,67254.8%+1.71,59950.8%-0.1
7Nemiga20812158.2%58%2,19353.6%+0.52,39852.7%+1.8
8BetBoom Team1378058.4%58%1,57453%-0.11,43549.5%-1.4
9Team Nemesis653858.5%57.8%64553.8%+0.774751.3%+0.4
10CYBERSHOKE Esports1699757.4%57.1%1,87854.7%+1.61,81851.1%+0.2
11NIP18610455.9%55.7%2,20953.8%+0.72,17948.3%-2.6
12Entropy301756.7%55.6%37253%-0.135551%+0.1
13FORZE Reload965052.1%52%1,07048.2%-4.91,06451.2%+0.3
14Zomblers281450%50%27454%+0.933948.4%-2.5
15Vexar251248%48.4%22250%-3.128647.2%-3.7
16ALKA GAMING17847.1%47.9%16446.3%-6.818351.4%+0.5
17G2 Ares572747.4%47.6%60750.6%-2.557547.3%-3.6
18ReThink15746.7%47.6%16950.3%-2.818851.6%+0.7
19 Phantom Academy9333.3%40%10347.6%-5.5
20WW Team18527.8%33.4%19940.7%-12.417651.7%+0.8
21BET-M 33431330.2%32.6%48545.8%-7.344242.8%-8.1
Nuke CS2 map

Nuke

Pooled baseline — CT 56.4% over 20,214 rounds · T 46.4% over 19,661 rounds4 more tracked teams sit below the 5-map minimum
#TeamMapsWonRaw winAdjustedCT rdsCT winCT vs mapT rdsT winT vs map
1BET-M 33402870%67.4%38063.4%+749050%+3.6
2Team Nemesis553665.5%64%57859.5%+3.166547.2%+0.8
3BetBoom Team1478859.9%59.5%1,51956%-0.41,67948.4%+2
4Legacy895359.6%59%1,01763.3%+6.990243.9%-2.5
5MIBR21812657.8%57.6%2,67959%+2.62,52345.1%-1.3
6G220411857.8%57.6%2,66858.2%+1.82,46046.9%+0.5
7OG1438156.6%56.3%1,79654.1%-2.31,77648.3%+1.9
8FORZE Reload864855.8%55.4%95853.4%-397947.7%+1.3
9Nemiga1769654.5%54.4%2,22755.8%-0.62,26546.3%-0.1
10NIP27414854%53.9%3,26057.2%+0.83,28446.7%+0.3
11Zomblers311651.6%51.3%33955.2%-1.230148.5%+2.1
12Entropy8450%50%12361%+4.611035.5%-10.9
13Saint Sinners6350%50%
14EMPIRE9444.4%46.6%10551.4%+5
15WW Team371745.9%46.5%44855.8%-0.637641.8%-4.6
16ALKA GAMING19842.1%44%20553.2%-3.220243.6%-2.8
17 Phantom Academy6233.3%41.6%
18Vexar12433.3%38.9%13247%-9.413243.9%-2.5
19CYBERSHOKE Esports1084037%37.7%1,29848.5%-7.997543.7%-2.7
20Just Players23626.1%31%27346.9%-9.522741.9%-4.5
Cache CS2 map

Cache

Pooled baseline — CT 48.4% over 2,774 rounds · T 51% over 2,710 rounds9 more tracked teams sit below the 5-map minimum
#TeamMapsWonRaw winAdjustedCT rdsCT winCT vs mapT rdsT winT vs map
1magic7685.7%69.2%10453.8%+5.4
2Nemiga8675%64.3%
3MIBR251456%54.8%31952.4%+433248.2%-2.8
4FORZE Reload5360%54.5%
5Team Nemesis5360%54.5%
6Entropy181055.6%54.2%18353%+4.622748.5%-2.5
7NIP482654.2%53.7%61144.5%-3.963855.3%+4.3
8G2562951.8%51.6%75344.9%-3.570156.2%+5.2
9ALKA GAMING6350%50%
10 Phantom Academy8337.5%42.9%
11G2 Ares7228.6%38.5%
12OG5120%36.4%
13Just Players9222.2%33.3%10840.7%-7.7

Best and worst map by team

The same records read the other way round. A team appears only for maps it has played at least 5 times, and needs two such maps before a best and a worst can be told apart. The pistol columns are pooled across every Active Duty map, not per map, and need 100+ pistol rounds — a per-map pistol rate is far too thin a sample to publish.

TeamBest mapWorst mapPistol rdsPistolvs pool
ALKA GAMING795Inferno 10 played, 70% raw62.5%Anubis 6 played, 0% raw25%19046.8%-4.3
Entropy7168Ancient 30 played, 56.7% raw55.6%Dust 2 23 played, 26.1% raw31%33644.6%-6.5
G271,343Inferno 327 played, 62.1% raw61.9%Cache 56 played, 51.8% raw51.6%2,68654%+2.9
MIBR71,200Anubis 128 played, 64.1% raw63.5%Mirage 235 played, 52.8% raw52.7%2,39951.2%+0.1
Nemiga71,268Cache 8 played, 75% raw64.3%Dust 2 233 played, 51.1% raw51.1%2,53650.9%-0.2
NIP71,157Ancient 186 played, 55.9% raw55.7%Dust 2 135 played, 39.3% raw39.8%2,31346.5%-4.6
OG7985Ancient 195 played, 59% raw58.7%Cache 5 played, 20% raw36.4%1,97052.2%+1.1
BET-M 336196Nuke 40 played, 70% raw67.4%Ancient 43 played, 30.2% raw32.6%39252.8%+1.7
CYBERSHOKE Esports6748Anubis 131 played, 59.5% raw59.1%Inferno 28 played, 32.1% raw35.3%1,50453.4%+2.3
FORZE Reload6361Nuke 86 played, 55.8% raw55.4%Mirage 59 played, 49.2% raw49.3%72851.1%0
G2 Ares6262Anubis 26 played, 61.5% raw59.3%Cache 7 played, 28.6% raw38.5%52449.8%-1.3
Just Players6148Anubis 9 played, 66.7% raw60%Nuke 23 played, 26.1% raw31%29648.3%-2.8
Legacy6593Inferno 115 played, 67% raw66.2%Anubis 68 played, 51.5% raw51.4%1,19055.5%+4.4
magic6152Cache 7 played, 85.7% raw69.2%Mirage 40 played, 55% raw54.3%30450%-1.1
Team Nemesis6266Nuke 55 played, 65.5% raw64%Cache 5 played, 60% raw54.5%53449.3%-1.8
Vexar675Inferno 9 played, 66.7% raw60%Nuke 12 played, 33.3% raw38.9%15042.7%-8.4
WW Team6248Dust 2 77 played, 63.6% raw62.6%Ancient 18 played, 27.8% raw33.4%50450.2%-0.9
BetBoom Team5613Mirage 157 played, 61.8% raw61.4%Anubis 98 played, 58.2% raw57.7%1,23850.2%-0.9
ReThink549Mirage 11 played, 54.5% raw52.9%Inferno 7 played, 0% raw23.1%10055%+3.9
Zomblers5139Inferno 28 played, 53.6% raw53%Dust 2 21 played, 47.6% raw48.1%28053.9%+2.8
Phantom Academy431Mirage 8 played, 62.5% raw57.1%Ancient 9 played, 33.3% raw40%
EMPIRE438Mirage 5 played, 60% raw54.5%Dust 2 12 played, 33.3% raw38.9%
UPGRADE216Anubis 8 played, 75% raw64.3%Dust 2 8 played, 37.5% raw42.9%
Saint Sinners16

Pick and ban matrix

How often each team has actually picked or banned each map in a tracked veto. These are counts of what happened, not tendencies inferred from results. Counts are shown for every team; the share next to a count appears only once that team has 50+ of that action.

TeamMirage CS2 map MirageInferno CS2 map InfernoDust 2 CS2 map Dust 2Anubis CS2 map AnubisAncient CS2 map AncientNuke CS2 map NukeCache CS2 map CacheTotal
NIP15 7.3%9 4.4%7 3.4%11 5.3%42 20.4%106 51.5%16 7.8%206
CYBERSHOKE Esports92 28%0 0%70 21.3%94 28.7%66 20.1%5 1.5%1 0.3%328
Nemiga10 3.8%12 4.6%48 18.5%56 21.5%122 46.9%7 2.7%5 1.9%260
MIBR29 15%41 21.2%2 1%46 23.8%39 20.2%31 16.1%5 2.6%193
G239 13.9%78 27.9%84 30%14 5%29 10.4%23 8.2%13 4.6%280
BetBoom Team65 30.8%0 0%22 10.4%22 10.4%33 15.6%69 32.7%0 0%211
Legacy44 21.9%73 36.3%32 15.9%11 5.5%31 15.4%10 5%0 0%201
OG13 7.2%27 15%16 8.9%12 6.7%80 44.4%30 16.7%2 1.1%180
FORZE Reload10 9.2%0 0%20 18.3%1 0.9%41 37.6%35 32.1%2 1.8%109
Team Nemesis10 9.3%14 13%8 7.4%0 0%40 37%36 33.3%0 0%108
G2 Ares24 26.7%32 35.6%8 8.9%7 7.8%17 18.9%0 0%2 2.2%90
WW Team39 36.4%1 0.9%56 52.3%5 4.7%2 1.9%4 3.7%0 0%107
BET-M 3314 17.5%17 21.3%5 6.3%0 0%11 13.8%33 41.3%0 0%80
magic22 31.4%3 4.3%6 8.6%2 2.9%37 52.9%0 0%0 0%70
Just Players38 59.4%0 0%3 4.7%0 0%23 35.9%0 0%0 0%64
Entropy29 46%1 1.6%0 0%7 11.1%9 14.3%0 0%17 27%63
Zomblers6 10%18 30%9 15%0 0%19 31.7%8 13.3%0 0%60
ALKA GAMING12144810241
Vexar2225202033
ReThink2030130018
EMPIRE325114117
Phantom Academy802024016
UPGRADE002610110
Saint Sinners30200207
REVENIX20011004
Giant Pandas00101002
Unreal Nightmare 10000012
Aritmije00001001

What this page does not tell you

The sample is the tracked teams playing recent tier-S and tier-A matches — around 29 of them, not the whole professional scene. A team missing from a table has not been judged and found wanting; it either is not in the sample or has not played that map enough to rank.

Nor is opponent strength accounted for. A 70% record built against weaker opposition and one built at a Major both read as 70% here, because the per-map records the provider exposes do not say who the opponent was. Read these tables as "how has this team fared on this map", not as a strength rating.

Only the 7 Active Duty maps are ranked. Reserve maps (Overpass, Vertigo, Train) stay playable in Competitive matchmaking but cannot appear in a professional veto, so a record on one is not a specialism worth acting on.

Frequently asked

Which pro team is best on each CS2 map?
The tables above rank every tracked team that has played at least 5 games on a map, using a sample-adjusted win rate. Rankings cover the 7 Active Duty maps (Mirage, Inferno, Dust 2, Anubis, Ancient, Nuke, and Cache) and change as new results come in, so the answer is generated rather than fixed.
Why is a team with a 100% win rate not top of the table?
Because a perfect record over two or three maps is not evidence of a specialism. Teams under 5 maps on a given map are not ranked at all, and the teams that are ranked are ordered by an adjusted win rate that pulls thin records towards 50%. The raw win rate and the number of maps behind it are both shown, so you can see exactly what was adjusted.
What do the CT and T columns mean?
They are the team's own round win rate on each side of that map, shown against the map's pooled rate for the same side. Nuke is CT-sided for everybody, so a 55% CT record there is unremarkable — what the "vs map" column shows is how far above or below the map's own baseline a team sits. A side figure appears only once a team has at least 100 rounds on that side, and the round count is printed next to every percentage.
Why do some teams show a win rate but no CT or T figure?
Because rounds are a different sample from maps played. A CS2 map is about twelve rounds per side, so a team that has just cleared the 5-map threshold has only around sixty rounds of each side — below the 100-round minimum the side columns require. Rather than show a rate the sample does not support, those cells are left as a dash.
How is the adjusted win rate calculated?
Each team's record on a map has 6 imaginary coin-flip maps added to it before the percentage is taken. A 5-0 record becomes 72.7% rather than 100%, while a 60% record over 20 maps only eases to 57.7%. It is one rule applied to one pair of numbers — wins and maps played — not a weighted score of several ingredients. It is applied to map records only, never to the CT and T round rates.
What counts as a team's worst map?
The Active Duty map with its lowest adjusted win rate, among maps it has played at least 5 times. Maps a team has barely played are excluded rather than assumed bad, and a team that clears the threshold on only one map gets no best-versus-worst comparison at all — with one map, both would be the same row.
Why is there no per-map pistol round win rate?
Because the sample does not support one. A CS2 map has about two pistol rounds, so a team with twenty games on a map has roughly forty pistol rounds there, giving a margin of error near eight percentage points — bigger than any gap that would be interesting. Matching the confidence of the CT and T columns would need about fifty games on a single map, which no team in this sample has. Rather than print a noisy number we pool each team's pistol rounds across all 7 Active Duty maps, where the sample reaches several hundred rounds, and label it as a pool-wide figure.
Are the pick and ban numbers real, or inferred?
They are counts of tracked vetoes — how many times a team actually picked or banned each map. Nothing is inferred from win rates or from how well a team plays a map. Shares are only shown once a team has at least 50 of that action, so a team with three tracked picks gets counts but no percentages. One known gap: a map only appears if the provider carries a line for that team and map, so a map a team always bans and consequently never plays can be under-counted.
Where does this data come from?
PandaScore competitive match data, aggregated per team per map — the same sample behind our map meta and individual map pages. It covers the tracked teams playing recent tier-S and tier-A matches, not every professional team in the world.