Anubis Gaming 3-0 Karmine Corp Blue — EMEA Masters 2026 Results & Stats
Anubis Gaming beat Karmine Corp Blue 3-0 in EMEA Masters 2026. Full series recap: drafts, gold timelines, player stats and odds history.


Market path
Higher = better for Anubis Gaming
Never fell below 16%; closed out 3-0.
- G1 draftwon35%
- G2 draftwon32%
- G3 draftwon45%
Anubis Gaming swept Karmine Corp Blue 3-0, surviving two close games before a decisive Game 3.
MVP
13.00 KDA in Game 1
Verified predictions
- Live draft model per game: G1 model favored Karmine Corp Blue 50% (lost); G2 model favored Anubis Gaming 51% (won); G3 model favored Anubis Gaming 50% (won). Pre-match
TL;DR: Anubis Gaming swept Karmine Corp Blue 3-0 in the EMEA Masters 2026 Summer Main Event, turning a market that backed Karmine into a series of successive reversals. Anubis won two extremely narrow openers before breaking away in Game 3, a late-series surge that made the sweep emphatic.
Key Takeaways
- B Butcher was the series’ steadying presence on Milio, posting a 13.00 KDA in Game 1 as Anubis found a way to win despite only 1 kill apiece.
- The most decisive shift came in Game 3: Anubis went from a 1-1 kill score in each opener to an 18-1 finish, turning a close series into a clear closing statement.
- Anubis Gaming won the series 3-0. The first two games ended 9.0k to 8.7k and were razor-thin; Game 3’s 17-kill margin showed how completely the momentum had changed.
Before the Series
The pre-match call leaned heavily toward Karmine Corp Blue, priced at 84% to take the series against Anubis Gaming’s 16%. That expectation framed the opening: Anubis were not merely chasing a win, but challenging a forecast that gave them little room.
The draft model split its judgment across the series. In Game 1, it favored Karmine Corp Blue at 50%, and that edge did not translate into a win. In Game 2, it gave Anubis a narrow 51% advantage, which held as Anubis won again. Game 3 was nearly even, with Anubis favored at 50%; there, too, the model’s pick matched the result. The predictions were not a clean sweep of their own: the opening read failed, while the later two aligned with Anubis’s victories.
Setting the Tone
Game 1 overturned the match-day confidence in Karmine without producing a conventional blowout. Anubis won with 1 kill to Karmine Corp Blue’s 1, and neither side recorded a tower, dragon, or Baron in the supplied totals. Yet the gold finished 9.0k to 8.7k for Anubis, a slim advantage with real weight in a game where there was so little separating the teams.
Shy Carry gave Anubis its clearest lane signal on Lucian, with 4/2/6 and a +887 gold difference at 15. Opposite him, Looki finished 3/3/5 on Ashe. Behind the win, B Butcher’s Milio recorded a 13.00 KDA, the kind of stabilizing performance that mattered when the scoreboard offered so few openings. The Game 1 draft-close market had Karmine at 65%, so Anubis’s result was an upset as well as a challenge to the pre-series consensus.
Game 2 repeated the narrow kill count—Karmine Corp Blue 1, Anubis Gaming 1—and lasted 4:50. Anubis’s second victory turned a single surprise into a pattern. The market had again favored Karmine at the draft close, at 68%, but another result against that expectation sent the series outlook sharply toward Anubis.
Sealing It
By Game 3, the story finally broke open. Anubis won 18-1 in kills, a sharp contrast with the near-silent opening games, and finished the series with a decisive performance rather than another close escape. The draft-close market was almost level—Karmine Corp Blue at 55%, Anubis at 45%—and this time it read the game as a coin flip. Anubis made the result look anything but one.
Aftermath
The sweep was built in stages: survive the first tight test, repeat the result under pressure, then turn the final game into a statement. Anubis Gaming’s 3-0 victory stands out not because every game was dominant, but because the team kept winning while the series was still close—and then closed with overwhelming force.
Polymarket Trajectory
The market began with a strong Karmine Corp Blue lean, but the series exposed how little that confidence accounted for Anubis’s ability to convert close games. The first two draft-close calls both favored Karmine, and both failed; the market’s biggest reassessment came after Game 2, when the series outlook swung toward Anubis. That correction recognized the accumulating evidence, though it arrived only after two defeats for the original favorite. Game 3’s near-even price was more cautious and closer to the uncertainty the opening games had suggested. The draft model offered a more mixed signal: it missed Game 1, then favored Anubis in each of the next two. No single forecast captured the sweep from the start, but the repeated narrow wins made the eventual shift increasingly hard to ignore.
Series Stats
| Game | Winner | Duration | Kills | Series MVP Highlight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Anubis Gaming | 3:10 | Karmine Corp Blue 1 – Anubis Gaming 1 | B Butcher, Milio, 13.00 KDA |
| 2 | Anubis Gaming | 4:50 | Karmine Corp Blue 1 – Anubis Gaming 1 | Anubis Gaming, individual highlight not supplied |
| 3 | Anubis Gaming | 25:40 | Karmine Corp Blue 1 – Anubis Gaming 18 | Anubis Gaming, individual highlight not supplied |
FAQ
Q: Why did Anubis Gaming win the series?
Anubis converted two close games despite the market favoring Karmine Corp Blue, then won Game 3 by 18-1 in kills.
Q: How could Karmine Corp Blue have changed the series?
The Game 1 draft model favored Karmine at 50%, and the draft-close market gave them 65%; turning that narrow opener into a win could have changed the series trajectory.
*Odds via Polymarket, 2026-10-10 18:38 UTC.*