← Blog

Anubis Gaming’s Winning Run Reaches Six After Game 2

By Draftlol Analysis Desk4 min read

Anubis Gaming extended its winning run to six with a 25-7 rout of Ruddy Corporation, turning Gwen’s top-lane advantage into a 17k gold lead.

GAME 2EMEA MastersSummer Main EventBo5Game 2Patch 26.18
Anubis Gaming
Anubis GamingWinner
25:43
Ruddy Corporation
Ruddy Corporation
Polymarket · Game marketmarket probability · Anubis Gaming · Ruddy CorporationFAVORITE
Game (draft close)Anubis Gaming won (76% pre-game)
76%·25%
Series (now)post-game · Anubis Gaming 2-0 Ruddy Corporation
98%·2%
Series (draft close)pre-game anchor
92%·8%
Δ Series after this game: +6.0pp for Anubis Gaming

maged’s Gwen opened the top-lane path to Anubis Gaming’s sixth straight win.

MVP

Theocacs
TheocacsXin ZhaoXin Zhao

Finished 8/1/14 with a 22.00 KDA as Anubis Gaming won 25-7.

Verified predictions

  • Live draft model favored Ruddy Corporation at 50%. They lost — confirm whether the draft edge materialized in-game. Pre-match

TL;DR: With Anubis Gaming one win from closing out the EMEA Masters 2026 Summer Main Event series, maged’s Gwen turned a top-lane gold advantage into a runaway victory. Anubis won 25-7 in 26:00, built a 17k gold lead, and extended its winning run to six; Theocacs’s Xin Zhao finished with a 22.00 KDA.

Key Takeaways

  • maged put Gwen +1171 gold ahead at 15, turning top lane into Anubis Gaming’s launchpad.
  • Theocacs drove the fight control with Xin Zhao’s 22/1/14 line and 22.00 KDA, anchoring a 25-7 win.
  • Anubis Gaming collected 9 towers and 3 dragons in 26:00, leaving Ruddy Corporation without a tower or a Baron.

Building the Lead

The series stakes were clear: after taking Game 1, Anubis Gaming needed one more win to close the BO5, while Ruddy Corporation had to stop the run before it ended the contest. Instead, Game 2 extended Anubis’s winning streak to 6 and gave its top laner room to dictate the pace.

The early gold-difference figures make the eventual result more striking. Ruddy’s Ashe and Jarvan IV were each ahead by 500 and 715 gold respectively at 15, but Anubis found a different pressure point. maged’s Gwen was +1171 at the same mark, a lead that gave the team a potent threat in the side lane and in later fights. The numbers don’t establish a specific early play, but they show how sharply the top-lane advantage contrasted with Ruddy’s advantages elsewhere.

Anubis converted that favorable matchup into collective control. Theocacs’s Xin Zhao ended 8/1/14, while Giyuu’s Ahri added 4/1/9. Their damage and crowd-control threat helped turn scattered opportunities into a coordinated snowball, even though the supplied stats don’t specify the exact sequence of fights.

The Numbers Tell the Story

By the finish, Anubis had 25 kills to Ruddy’s 7 and a 58.9k to 42.0k gold advantage. That 16.9k gap—approximately the 17k lead described for the game—was more than a comfortable cushion: it reflected a map Ruddy could barely contest. Anubis took 9 towers, while Ruddy took 0.

The objective count confirms the same pattern. Anubis secured 3 dragons and the game’s only Baron; Ruddy managed 1 dragon and no Barons. The result was decisive in just 26:00, with no late-game comeback window opening.

Around the carry duo, the supporting numbers reveal how Anubis kept its pressure alive. B Butcher’s Lulu recorded 2/3/17, and Shy Carry’s Yunara finished 4/2/12. The available KP and DMG% fields are incomplete, so they cannot reliably quantify each player’s share of the action.

The Final Push

Ruddy’s champions still found kills: Nano’s Viktor went 3/3/3, and Ano’s Jarvan IV finished 3/6/4. But those returns never became towers or a Baron. Robocop’s Sion ended 1/5/0, while J3rkie’s Seraphine went 0/6/5, leaving too little room for Ruddy to stabilize.

The pre-game draft signals were mixed. One live draft model favored Ruddy Corporation at 50%, but that edge did not materialize in the match: Anubis won comfortably. A separate draft-analysis note instead gave Anubis a 69% advantage, citing stronger team form and Elo, along with Lulu’s protection for Yunara. The game’s result aligned with that more favorable Anubis assessment, while the available stats do not establish which draft factor decided the contest.

Polymarket Market

The game market had Anubis Gaming at 76% and Ruddy Corporation at 24% when the draft closed. Anubis delivered the expected result, and the decisive 25-7 scoreline matched the market’s strong pre-game lean. The draft-model signals were less uniform: one favored Ruddy at 50%, while the separate draft analysis rated Anubis at 69%. In play, Anubis’s top-lane advantage and objective control settled the disagreement, though the supplied figures cannot isolate what the market anticipated about those factors.

At series level, Anubis was already priced at 92% after the draft and moved to 98% after the win, a rise of 6.0 percentage points; Ruddy fell from 8% to 2%. The series remains alive, but the market now sees Anubis as overwhelmingly likely to close it in the next game.

FAQ

Q: Did the live draft model’s 50% lean toward Ruddy Corporation prove accurate?

No. Ruddy lost 25-7 in 26:00, while Anubis built a roughly 17k gold lead and took every tower.

Q: What made maged’s Gwen such a decisive factor?

The supplied stats show a +1171 gold advantage at 15 and a 7/0/7 finish, giving Anubis a powerful top-lane threat.

*Odds via Polymarket, 2026-10-07 17:36 UTC.*

Next chapter · Draft G3Anubis Gaming’s Karma Gamble vs Ruddy in EMEA Masters →