Split produced the largest side imbalance of the Champions Shanghai group stage, with attackers winning 66% of rounds and defenders taking 34%. Summit stood at the opposite end of the dataset with an exact 50-50 division. The seven-map sample also shows Summit was played most often, appearing in 10 maps before the playoffs.
Frequency and side balance answer different questions. Summit’s 10 appearances made it the most common selection, but those maps did not produce an advantage for either starting side. Lotus followed with eight appearances, while Sunset and Ascent were each played seven times. The remaining maps appeared less often: Split six times, Haven five and Abyss four.
The side results varied widely inside that rotation. Split’s 66% attacking share was the largest gap in either direction. Lotus also favored attackers, though by a smaller margin, at 58% to 42%. Those two maps were the only entries in the dataset where attack won a majority of rounds.
Four maps leaned toward defense. Abyss recorded the strongest defensive share at 56%, followed by Sunset at 55% and Ascent at 54%. Haven came closest to parity among the defense-leaning maps, with defenders winning 52% and attackers 48%. Summit alone finished perfectly level.
Popularity did not determine side balance
The most-played map was also the most balanced, but that relationship did not hold throughout the pool. Split was played six times and produced the sharpest attacking advantage. Abyss appeared only four times and showed the largest defensive edge. The sample therefore offers no simple rule that more appearances automatically create a more even result.
Lotus provides another useful contrast. Its eight appearances made it the second-most common map, yet attackers won 58% of its rounds. Sunset and Ascent were tied on seven appearances, but their defensive advantages were 55% and 54% respectively. Similar frequency can coexist with slightly different side patterns.
The figures describe what happened in the completed group stage. They do not identify why each round was won, and they cannot separate map design from team selection, pistol results, compositions or opponent quality. Any tactical explanation must therefore remain distinct from the verified percentages.
For playoff preparation, the dataset is a reference rather than a command. Teams can study whether their own results followed the event pattern, then decide if the difference came from execution or from the matchups they faced. A broad attacking trend on Split does not guarantee that every playoff attack will be favored.
The same caution applies to Abyss. Its 56% defensive share is the largest defensive result in the group sample, but it is based on four appearances, the fewest in the rotation. A smaller map count leaves each series with more influence on the overall percentage, so the figure should be reported precisely without inflating it into a permanent property of the map.
Summit’s 50-50 split across 10 appearances gives the broadest balanced sample in this event phase. That makes it notable before the bracket, especially because it was also the most frequently played map. It still does not promise equal halves in a particular series, where team strengths and starting sides can create a different result.
Playoffs create a new map sample
The eight-team playoff stage begins on October 7. Each additional series will change both the appearance totals and the round-win percentages, particularly on maps with fewer group-stage selections. Split’s attacking lead and Abyss’s defensive lead may grow, narrow or reverse as the bracket develops.
That is why the group dataset should be preserved as a completed phase. It provides a clear baseline across all seven maps without pretending to be the final tournament total. Analysts can later compare the playoff sample against it and identify whether preparation altered the side distribution.
The early picture is nevertheless distinct. Split delivered the strongest attack-side result, Abyss led the defensive side, Summit was exactly balanced and the map frequencies ranged from 10 appearances to four. Those facts give viewers a better framework for reading vetoes without turning historical percentages into guaranteed outcomes.
Champions Shanghai’s group stage produced a varied map profile. Split favored attack by the widest margin, Abyss leaned most toward defense, and Summit combined the highest frequency with perfect side balance. The playoffs will create a separate sample and test whether those patterns persist.
