BGH 3v3 Tournament Run Report v0.1

Date: 2026-06-03

Replay filter:

• Time window: January 22, 2026 through March 31, 2026.
• Map filter: Big Game Hunters / BGH.
• Mode filter: Top vs Bottom.
• Team identity filter: games containing PurE)Rabbit-SF, [24h].gungun, and Hao2026.

Privacy boundary: this report uses replay metadata, player/race/team/result/APM/EAPM, and game titles. It does not quote private replay chat.

Executive Summary

I found 22 BGH 3v3 games where Jun, Gungun, and Hao were on the same team.

Decided record:

• 9W-11L
• 2 unknown/remake/no-decision games
• all 22 games were BGH Top vs Bottom 3v3 structures

Series breakdown:

First read:

This team was competitive before the quarterfinal-level set, but the quarterfinal exposed the ceiling. Hao and Gungun were fixed Protoss anchors. Jun was the flex slot. The strongest default was triple-Protoss. The weakest recurring version was Jun-on-Terran.

Player Roles

Hao and Gungun were fixed Protoss players in this sample:

• Hao2026: 22 Protoss games, average APM/EAPM about 154.5 / 135.3.
• [24h].gungun: 22 Protoss games, average APM/EAPM about 267.6 / 184.2.

Jun was the flex slot:

• 10 Terran games.
• 7 Protoss games.
• 5 Zerg games.
• Overall average APM/EAPM about 207.3 / 171.7.

The team structure is the important point:

• Hao is the slower but stable Protoss anchor.
• Gungun is the high-activity Protoss anchor.
• Jun is the tactical swing slot, and team results changed sharply by Jun's race.

Composition Results

Composition order is Hao / Jun / Gungun.

This is the strongest coaching signal in the batch. Hao and Gungun were always Protoss, so Jun's race was the team lever. When Jun also played Protoss, the team had the clearest shared language. When Jun played Terran, the team often lost faster or failed to convert activity into team value.

Series Notes

Hao Team vs CR Team

Record: 2W-2L-1U.

Game flow:

• 7:57 win with P/T/P.
• 4:55 loss with P/T/P.
• 4:15 unknown with P/P/P.
• 19:02 win with P/P/P.
• 11:27 loss with P/T/P.

Read: the longest clean win was triple-Protoss. The Terran games were split early, with two losses and one win.

24H Jimmy Cup, Hao vs Lo

Record: 2W-1L-1U.

Game flow:

• 7:33 win with P/T/P.
• 5:53 loss with P/T/P.
• 13:06 win with P/P/P.
• 7:27 unknown with P/Z/P.

Read: again, the cleanest mid-length win was triple-Protoss. The Terran result was mixed.

24H Jimmy Cup, Hao vs Yu

Record: 2W-3L.

Game flow:

• 5:37 loss with P/T/P.
• 15:26 loss with P/P/P.
• 20:51 win with P/P/P.
• 23:05 win with P/P/P.
• 7:51 loss with P/P/P.

Read: this is the best Protoss-baseline review group because it has long triple-Protoss wins and triple-Protoss losses.

24h Match Block

Record: 3W-1L.

Game flow:

• 14:05 win with P/T/P.
• 23:30 win with P/Z/P.
• 14:10 loss with P/Z/P.
• 13:58 win with P/Z/P.

Read: Jun's Zerg was viable here. The question is not whether Jun can play Zerg; it is whether Zerg has a clear team objective when opponent quality rises.

24H Jimmy Cup Quarterfinal

Record: 0W-4L.

Game flow:

• 6:23 loss with P/Z/P.
• 6:49 loss with P/T/P.
• 18:41 loss with P/T/P.
• 3:49 loss with P/T/P.

Read: this was the collapse set. Three of the four games had Jun on Terran, and the team did not get a win. The 18:41 Terran loss matters because it shows the issue was not only early death.

Coaching Diagnosis

1. Default To Triple-Protoss

The evidence says default to P/P/P unless there is a deliberate counter-plan.

Tournament rule:

If the match matters and no counter-plan is prepared, run triple-Protoss first.

2. Repair Jun Terran

P/T/P went 3W-7L.

The problem is not raw APM. The issue is team conversion:

• Does Terran protect the correct shared entrance?
• Does the first Marine/Bunker/Depot shape actually save Hao/Gungun timing?
• Does tech arrive as a team timing, not a personal timing?
• Does Terran create a concrete enemy response before the team falls behind?

Terran review rule:

By 6-8 minutes, Jun Terran must have created visible team value: held an entrance, saved an ally, forced pressure back, or produced a timing the Protoss anchors can use.

3. Treat Hao As The Stable Anchor

Hao's APM/EAPM is lower than Jun and Gungun, but Hao was present in every game as Protoss. Hao is not the chaos slot; Hao is an anchor.

Review target:

Identify Hao's first vulnerable window in each loss, then check whether Jun or Gungun had a realistic cover option.

4. Convert Gungun's Activity Into Team Leverage

Gungun's Protoss activity was very high. The question is whether that activity becomes team-wide leverage:

• first Dragoon/Zealot movement supports the correct side
• pressure pulls enemy attention away from Hao
• midgame army arrives before the vulnerable ally breaks
• late-game tech converges with the team rather than staying local

Best Deep-Dive Replays

Use these first:

1. 233541,(8)Big Game Hunters.rep - 20:51 win vs Yu, P/P/P.
2. 000045,(8)Big Game Hunters.rep - 23:05 win vs Yu, P/P/P.
3. 231149,(8)Big Game Hunters.rep - 15:26 loss vs Yu, P/P/P.
4. 221653,! (8)Big Game Hunters.rep - 18:41 quarterfinal loss, P/T/P.
5. 234857,(1)[XB2] Big Game Hunters.rep - 14:05 win, P/T/P.
6. 001505,(1)[XB2] Big Game Hunters.rep - 23:30 win, P/Z/P.

Coach Verdict

This was a real tournament-style BGH trio, not random ladder noise.

Hao and Gungun were fixed Protoss anchors. Jun was the flex player. The team's best evidence-based default is P/P/P; the biggest repair lane is Jun Terran in P/T/P; Jun Zerg is playable but needs a clearer team objective against stronger opponents.