How did 100 Thieves knock Team Falcons out of BLAST Bounty Summer 2026? Analysis by innersh1ne

The BLAST Bounty Summer 2026 qualifiers turned out to be full of surprises—one of the unexpected results was 100 Thieves’ victory over Team Falcons. This could be attributed to a slow start to the season, but the gap in skill between the Major champions and the “Thieves” should have been wide enough to comfortably defeat the underdog in a best-of-3 series. Let’s break down what happened in the head-to-head matchup between the teams.

Four rounds on Nuke—a map they’re known to excel on—is, to put it mildly, a questionable result. And it’s tough to start a series on that note. Unfortunately, we can only fully assess their offense, since they played too few rounds on defense. 100 Thieves had almost no chance on Nuke—in the first few rounds, Howard “rain” Nygard’s team was pushed back on the “ramp,” the “street,” and Site A—0:5. The “Thieves’” game plan consisted of scripted pushes to Site A interspersed with rounds via the “ramp.” In the first half, 100 Thieves pushed to Site A four times, and lost all four without a chance.

Point defenders A, René “TeSeS” Madsen and Finn “karrigan” Andersen, were as prepared and focused as possible to counter such pushes—if the A-side players weren’t caught off guard, the round was unlikely to succeed. 100 Thieves, on the other hand, was too straightforward in its approach—not only with its pushes to A, but with its offense in general. This strategy might have worked against many teams, but Team Falcons’ players are simply too skilled individually.

The victory on Dust2 was decisive, but it belongs primarily to Alex “poiii” Niholm Sundgren and rain. The former dominated on defense (rating 3.0, 2.15), while the latter did the same on offense (rating 3.0, 1.78). Looking at the score, things might not seem so bad—7:13—but in reality, Team Falcons won only the pistol round and the subsequent anti-force and anti-eco rounds. The seventh round proved decisive, as poiii single-handedly wiped out 100 Thieves while they were attempting to push to Site B.

The situation repeated itself in the eleventh round. An interesting fact: nine out of twelve times, 100 Thieves started on defense while outnumbered. Yet they won half of those rounds with a score of 8:4—the team played 4v5 in 75% of the rounds, and the “Thieves” did an excellent job of predicting where the attack would go.

As for 100 Thieves’ offense, Jack “Gizmy” von Sprekelsen did an excellent job setting the pace on T and almost completely outplayed Team Falcons in macro—there wasn’t a single round where he made a wrong decision.

Both halves on the desider, Anubis, ended with lopsided scores—10:2 and 9:3, respectively—but 100 Thieves emerged victorious. Team Falcons started the map confidently, alternating pushes on B with rounds through mid. This completely threw off the “Thieves’” defense.

Meanwhile, 100 Thieves’ attack excellently countered the vast majority of the Falcons’ early aggression—the American organization’s roster barely gave up any kills at the start of rounds. Midway through the round, Gizmy confidently pushed through mid, and from that vantage point, the “Thieves” took control of the map and closed out the round at A.

Toward the end of the match, 100 Thieves led Team Falcons to believe they wouldn’t go for point B, and this turned out to be the right macro decision—outnumbered in a 3v4 situation, 100 Thieves unexpectedly changed the direction of their attack and closed out the match.

Let’s briefly summarize the results:

Photo — 100 Thieves.