nate — CS2 Stats

76561197968665849[U:1:8400121]Steam profile ↗✓ No bans

319Tracked matches76%Win rate2020Tracked since

CSDB Rating7.3 StrongEntry Fragger

FaceitLevel 6Top 54.0% of ranked FACEIT players

Ladder ranks via Leetify

Share this profile

The image is a snapshot; the link keeps updating. Nothing here is published anywhere — it is generated in your browser when you click.

Performance scores

Aim88

Positioning70

Utility32

0–100 skill scores via Leetify.

Recent form

STEADY65–28–7Last 10065%Win rateLLWLLWWWWW

Last 10 vs previous 10: -20pp win rate · -0.01 avg rating

Player DNA

Primary style: Entry Fragger — High opening-fight frequency with above-par success in them.

Aim8.8

Aggression10.0

Utility3.2

Positioning7.0

Opening Duels6.3

Clutch3.4

Sharp aimerStrong CT-side opener

Style profile from tracked-match aggregates — how this player plays, not how good they are. Classification rules are deterministic and documented in code.

Your pro match

Plays most like s1mple 89% playstyle similarity

Most alike: opening-fight frequency, positioning profile.

Where you differ: lower utility contribution.

Similarity of playstyle shape across shared dimensions — it says how you play, not that you play at their level. Full comparison →

Strengths & areas to improve

Strengths

Aim. Aim score of 88 — the mechanical foundation is a clear strength.

CT openings. 65% CT opening-duel success — winning the first fight on the defending side is rare and valuable.

Areas to improve

Preaim. Mechanical aim is strong but the crosshair sits 10.0° off target when enemies appear — placement, not flicking, is the bigger win available.

Utility. Utility contribution runs far behind the mechanical game — the cheapest rating gain on this profile is thrown, not aimed.

T-side openings. Opening success drops from 65% on CT to 45% on T — the same duels are being taken with worse setups on the attacking side.

Generated by fixed rules over this profile's own numbers — no model, no guessing; silent when the sample is too small to support a claim.

CSDB Rating breakdown

Aim8.8

Positioning7.0

Utility3.2

Mechanics7.6

Opening Duels6.3

Win Impact10.0

Composite 7.3/10 (Strong), a weighted mean of the bars with a small opposition adjustment (×1.00 for this rank band). Formula versioned (v1) and documented in code.

Trends

Match rating0.05+0.03

first ⅓ avg 0.02 → last ⅓ avg 0.05

Reaction time514ms−4ms

first ⅓ avg 519ms → last ⅓ avg 514ms

Headshot accuracy24.8%−0.3%

first ⅓ avg 25.1% → last ⅓ avg 24.8%

Rolling 5-match average across the last 100 tracked matches, oldest to newest. The delta compares the first third of the window with the last.

Highlights

0.18Best rating — vertigo 10–5

13–0Biggest win — alpine

14Longest win streak

L2Current streak

7–2In matches decided by ≤2 rounds

5Overtime games

Map breakdown

dust2Best map · 75% over 20anubisWeakest map · 17% over 6

Map	Grade	Played	Record	Win rate	Avg rating
mirage	A	25	15–10	60%	0.04
dust2	S	20	15–5	75%	0.04
cache	A	14	9–5	64%	0.06
nuke	S	10	7–3	70%	0.06
inferno	B	6	3–3	50%	0.04
anubis	D	6	1–5	17%	0.02
overpass	—	4	2–2	50%	0.03
vertigo	—	4	3–1	75%	0.04
ancient	—	3	2–1	67%	-0.00
office	—	3	3–0	100%	0.08
italy	—	2	2–0	100%	0.01
train	—	2	2–0	100%	0.08
alpine	—	1	1–0	100%	0.04

Across the last 100 tracked matches.

Anubis is currently your weakest sufficiently-sampled map (17% over 6). Start with the 6 essential Anubis lineups, review the callouts, then spin up a practice server.

Faceit stats

Combat

43Matches

53%Win rate

1.61Avg K/D

109.9ADR

52%Headshot %

Clutches & streaks

37%1v1 clutch win

25%1v2 clutch win

8Longest win streak

Recent Faceit resultsWWWWL

Map	Matches	Win rate	Avg K/D	Avg kills
Dust2	9	56%	1.40	20.2
Anubis	6	67%	2.31	25.2
Mirage	5	80%	2.19	21.8
Inferno	3	100%	2.04	21.0
Cache	3	67%	2.25	24.7
Overpass	2	50%	1.44	18.5
Ancient	1	0%	0.18	3.0

Faceit-match stats via the FACEIT Data API — a separate match pool from the sections above.

Skill profile

Aggregate performance across tracked matches — stats via Leetify. Percentile context against other CSDB-tracked players arrives as our own benchmark data accumulates.

22.7%Headshot accuracy

38.3%Accuracy (enemy spotted)

42.8%Spray accuracy

84.3%Counter-strafing

10.0°Preaim

529msReaction time

45.4%T opening success

65.2%CT opening success

0.45Enemies flashed / flash

8.0%Flash assists

3.18HE damage / grenade

12.82Flashes / match

Recommended for you

Chosen by comparing your tracked metrics against the thresholds we flag — the measurement behind each one is shown, so you can disagree with it.

Grenades & Utility
Most of your flashes are blinding nobody. A handful of reliable pop-flash lineups fixes this faster than anything else.
Enemies flashed per flash 0.4549 — below the 0.5 mark we flag
Grenade Lineups →

Spend your practice time on Anubis

Map knowledge compounds faster than mechanics — lineups and callouts you learn once keep paying out every time the map comes up.

17% win rate across 6 tracked games — your weakest map with enough games to be worth reading into.

Anubis callouts & strategy →Anubis grenade lineups →

Recent matches

Map	Score	Rating	HS%	Date
overpass	0–13	0.00	0%	6 Jun →
nuke	0–7	-0.03	75%	6 Jun →
dust2	13–7	0.10	27%	5 Jun →
nuke	8–13	-0.07	23%	28 May →
cache	6–13	0.03	24%	28 May →
cache	13–9	0.10	27%	28 May →
cache	13–7	0.09	17%	28 May →
mirage	13–2	0.02	0%	28 May →
dust2	13–11	0.05	25%	28 May →
ancient	13–8	0.05	19%	27 May →
overpass	13–6	0.09	20%	27 May →
cache	8–13	0.06	16%	27 May →
alpine	13–0	0.04	21%	26 May →
cache	13–9	-0.00	14%	26 May →
italy	13–9	-0.02	18%	26 May →
office	13–4	0.15	23%	26 May →
nuke	4–1	0.18	56%	26 May →
mirage	13–8	0.03	21%	26 May →
mirage	1–13	-0.10	0%	26 May →
dust2	13–1	-0.00	22%	26 May →
nuke	13–0	0.04	29%	26 May →
cache	12–12	0.08	23%	25 May →
mirage	10–13	0.01	28%	25 May →
dust2	13–1	0.13	25%	25 May →
nuke	13–7	0.08	32%	25 May →
inferno	13–4	0.04	34%	23 May →
dust2	13–11	0.05	16%	22 May →
mirage	13–10	0.10	31%	22 May →
ancient	13–5	0.02	26%	21 May →
vertigo	13–10	-0.01	22%	20 May →
vertigo	10–5	0.18	37%	20 May →
office	13–10	0.07	31%	20 May →
dust2	13–8	0.08	38%	20 May →
mirage	13–6	0.13	21%	20 May →
dust2	13–9	0.04	25%	20 May →
mirage	13–7	0.06	19%	20 May →
cache	13–3	0.12	24%	20 May →
vertigo	8–13	0.03	10%	20 May →
anubis	12–12	0.05	17%	20 May →
dust2	13–2	0.10	30%	20 May →
train	13–2	0.11	29%	20 May →
dust2	13–9	0.01	16%	20 May →
mirage	16–12	0.05	26%	19 May →
cache	13–5	0.10	31%	19 May →
mirage	8–13	0.02	22%	19 May →
dust2	13–11	0.03	21%	19 May →
nuke	13–11	0.08	22%	19 May →
mirage	10–13	0.15	25%	19 May →
nuke	13–10	0.07	17%	19 May →
overpass	13–4	0.02	15%	19 May →
cache	11–13	0.06	26%	19 May →
mirage	12–12	-0.02	20%	19 May →
cache	13–4	0.05	28%	19 May →
anubis	3–13	0.01	20%	14 May →
vertigo	13–11	-0.02	15%	14 May →
mirage	4–12	0.06	29%	14 May →
inferno	13–5	0.09	15%	14 May →
mirage	8–13	0.02	22%	14 May →
cache	13–10	0.02	24%	14 May →
mirage	13–5	0.06	14%	14 May →
cache	13–7	0.08	32%	14 May →
inferno	12–12	0.07	30%	14 May →
train	7–1	0.05	29%	14 May →
inferno	13–5	0.08	20%	14 May →
cache	13–3	0.04	20%	14 May →
office	7–1	0.03	29%	14 May →
italy	13–10	0.04	17%	14 May →
mirage	13–5	0.09	17%	14 May →
nuke	7–13	0.03	29%	10 May →
nuke	13–11	0.05	25%	9 May →
dust2	10–13	0.01	19%	9 May →
dust2	3–13	-0.03	28%	9 May →
inferno	5–13	-0.02	27%	9 May →
anubis	8–13	-0.00	31%	9 May →
mirage	13–3	-0.01	28%	9 May →
nuke	13–6	0.14	34%	8 May →
dust2	15–15	0.04	19%	8 May →
mirage	13–9	0.08	21%	8 May →
dust2	7–13	0.05	35%	8 May →
mirage	13–8	-0.02	20%	8 May →
mirage	13–3	0.11	43%	8 May →
dust2	5–13	-0.01	19%	7 May →
dust2	13–3	0.08	33%	7 May →
mirage	4–13	0.04	17%	7 May →
mirage	15–15	0.04	20%	4 May →
dust2	13–4	0.09	33%	4 May →
mirage	13–11	-0.00	25%	4 May →
dust2	13–5	-0.02	29%	4 May →
mirage	13–16	0.01	22%	4 May →
dust2	13–8	0.01	31%	4 May →
overpass	10–13	-0.00	35%	4 May →
ancient	0–13	-0.09	7%	3 May →
anubis	15–15	0.03	21%	3 May →
cache	7–13	-0.02	23%	3 May →
inferno	3–13	-0.05	21%	3 May →
dust2	13–9	-0.04	23%	3 May →
mirage	13–7	0.05	27%	3 May →
anubis	11–13	0.02	23%	3 May →
mirage	13–9	0.01	23%	3 May →
anubis	13–7	0.03	19%	2 May →