I doubt it. The USSR / Russia concept of operations for nuclear missile submarines is way different from NATO countries. They don't typically conduct wide-ranging strategic deterrence patrols out in the open ocean. Instead they tend to stay in or near their own territorial waters, protected by surface warships and land-based aircraft. While US attack submarines have occasionally violated Russian territorial waters for special missions they don't do so on a regular basis because it's so dangerous.

Subs are very hard to track or to locate, which is why Washington has been deploying two thirds of their strategic warheads (the ones that are ready to use as opposed to being in cold storage or in disassembled state) on subs and why Russia, China, Britain, France and India all decided incur the substantial expense of deploying nukes on subs, too.

US attack subs are doing their best, but it's never 100%.

Nuclear missile subs are very good at hiding (they've been doing it for 60+ years) and the ocean is a big place.

1 Borei is what, 96 MIRVs?

Which is the point... even one missed is unacceptable.

It is a game you can play together

And not a single strategist on either side actually believes that to nullify the threat. A single boomer launching might not be outright MAD, but it would be too many warheads to defend against, and several major cities would be hit.