January NAC

Div I Men's Saber

Friday, January 7, 2022 at 2:00 PM

San Jose, CA, USA

Probability density of pool victories

Reset

Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool for each fencer, with their actual victories highlighted in a box. Learn more.

# Name Number of victories
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 SARON Mitchell S. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 74%
2 HOMER Daryl D. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 81%
3 WILLIAMS Grant W. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 94% 64%
3 BOOTH Zaheer 100% 100% 99% 94% 74% 39% 9%
5 MACKIEWICZ Andrew A. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 78%
6 COHEN Josef A. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 75%
7 CHOI HYUNSEOK 100% 100% 100% 95% 70% 30% 5%
8 ARFA Fares 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 70%
9 SOLOMON Daniel P. 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 75% 26%
10 VIDOVSZKY Robert T. 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 83% 43%
11 THOMPSON Khalil A. 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 86% 41%
12 SMITH Jared C. 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 83% 42%
13 TE VELDE Noah C. 100% 100% 99% 93% 74% 40% 11%
14 MATRICCIANI NOAH 100% 100% 99% 91% 61% 21% 3%
15 DENNER Lysander H. 100% 100% 96% 81% 49% 16% 1%
16 DINU Nicholas D. 100% 100% 97% 81% 45% 11%
17 CAUCHON Francois 100% 100% 100% 99% 90% 62% 22%
19 WEI Andrew 100% 100% 98% 86% 57% 22% 3%
20 RABINOWITZ Benjamin 100% 100% 100% 98% 87% 58% 20%
21 ANGLADE Junior Ronald (RJ) E. 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 78% 36%
22 KUSHKOV Simon O. 100% 100% 99% 91% 63% 26% 4%
23 OH Jason H. 100% 100% 100% 99% 94% 73% 30%
24 FIELDS Malcolm D. 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 86% 46%
25 MULLENNIX Ethan M. 100% 100% 100% 100% 94% 68% 24%
25 HARLEY Colby A. 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 80% 40%
27 CZYZEWSKI Konrad R. 100% 96% 75% 40% 12% 2% -
28 DOLEGIEWICZ Filip 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 90% 52%
29 JI Cody Walter 100% 100% 95% 77% 45% 15% 2%
30 LO Joshua H. 100% 100% 95% 75% 41% 12% 1%
31 HARVEY Nicholas J. 100% 100% 99% 90% 63% 24% 2%
32 BARBER William S. 100% 95% 72% 36% 9% 1% -
33 WOOD Elden S. 100% 100% 97% 83% 49% 14% 1%
34 MOON Sean H. 100% 100% 99% 93% 71% 35% 6%
35 ZU Kevin 100% 100% 98% 88% 57% 16%
36 MCBRIDE Jackson R. 100% 100% 100% 97% 85% 50% 10%
37 ARMIJO Gabriel K. 100% 100% 100% 99% 91% 64% 22%
38 CALLAHAN Jaden P. 100% 100% 99% 90% 64% 28% 5%
39 MEHTA Sachin N. 100% 100% 100% 97% 81% 43% 5%
40 DHINGRA Gian K. 100% 100% 96% 82% 52% 19% 3%
41 KOGAN Benjamin 100% 80% 36% 8% 1% -
42 TRAVERS Samir T. 100% 100% 99% 93% 70% 29% 2%
43 KIM Shaun M. 100% 84% 48% 17% 4% - -
44 HAMMERSTROM Jared 100% 99% 90% 63% 28% 6% -
45 WALKER Dalton F. 100% 100% 100% 99% 90% 56% 7%
46 FRIAS SAUL F. 100% 98% 88% 61% 29% 8% 1%
47 HU William 100% 100% 99% 90% 64% 26% 4%
48 ZIELINSKI Nicholaus M. 100% 99% 91% 59% 23% 5% -
49 BERMAN Luca 100% 94% 66% 29% 7% 1% -
50 DESROSIERS Olivier 100% 100% 100% 96% 78% 41% 8%
51 SOHN Kevin J. 100% 100% 98% 89% 61% 25% 4%
52 NOBLE Daniel 100% 99% 93% 70% 33% 7% -
53 BIVINS III George A. 100% 100% 100% 98% 88% 59% 20%
54 DENNER Maximilian P. 100% 92% 67% 32% 9% 1% -
55 LAI Adam J. 100% 100% 97% 84% 52% 18% 3%
55 KAYDALIN Artyom 100% 95% 73% 38% 10% 1% -
57 BRAR Sanjeet 100% 96% 77% 42% 13% 2% -
58 SCHMITT Trenton R. 100% 100% 100% 98% 85% 51% 11%
59 JOHNSON Andrew J. 100% 100% 100% 94% 73% 35% 7%
59 SMITH David C. 100% 99% 88% 59% 25% 5% -
61 BENAVRAM Lev C. 100% 99% 92% 66% 31% 8% 1%
62 RAI Avin 100% 100% 98% 89% 63% 27% 4%
63 HONG Vincent Q. 100% 94% 68% 31% 8% 1% -
64 HUSSAIN Faaris 100% 99% 90% 59% 21% 3%
65 LINDHOLM Oliver S. 100% 81% 41% 11% 2% < 1% -
66 DODRILL Grant 100% 100% 95% 76% 43% 14% 2%
67 REN Junming 100% 100% 99% 93% 72% 38% 9%
68 LIN Xiteng (Steven) 100% 100% 95% 75% 39% 10% 1%
69 MORRILL William 100% 100% 96% 79% 45% 13% 1%
70 JOHNSON Zachary (Zack) C. 100% 100% 100% 99% 89% 58% 17%
71 LINSKY Matthew 100% 100% 97% 82% 49% 17% 2%
72 WILLIAMS Nolan E. 100% 100% 99% 93% 73% 39% 10%
73 RIVERA Inigo Franco 100% 100% 97% 82% 47% 11% -
73 WU Mengke 100% 100% 97% 84% 51% 15% 1%
75 JIANG Anthony 100% 94% 64% 26% 6% 1% -
76 YEN Darren 100% 100% 99% 94% 74% 40% 10%
77 BERRIO Carter E. 100% 89% 59% 25% 6% 1% -
77 JEFFORDS Alexander 100% 100% 97% 84% 53% 17% 1%
79 YAKO george 100% 100% 99% 90% 63% 26% 4%
80 LIMB Matthew G. 100% 100% 99% 93% 73% 37% 8%
81 ZUBATIY Samuel 100% 94% 69% 33% 8% 1% -
82 SO Hananiah 100% 100% 96% 81% 48% 14% 1%
83 CHON Taylor A. 100% 98% 85% 52% 16% 2%
84 PARK Justin W. 100% 100% 95% 74% 36% 7%
85 BURGUNDER Quinten (Quin) A. 100% 100% 99% 91% 62% 21%
86 FERNANDEZ Rodrigo 100% 99% 93% 72% 40% 13% 2%
87 BULL Anderson 100% 87% 53% 19% 4% - -
87 TANN Justin 100% 99% 90% 65% 30% 7% 1%
89 NAZLYMOV Andrei 100% 76% 36% 10% 1% - -
90 KIM Charlson 100% 100% 100% 98% 87% 56% 17%
90 PAN Jack (Yuxiang) 100% 98% 83% 53% 21% 4% -
92 MORRILL Justin 100% 99% 88% 58% 23% 4% -
93 TONG Qilin 100% 99% 92% 72% 39% 13% 2%
94 BARRETO Elliott 100% 99% 95% 77% 45% 15% 2%
95 GUAY-TARDIF Xavier 100% 100% 95% 78% 44% 13% 1%
96 KULDELL Spencer D. 100% 100% 99% 95% 77% 41% 9%
97 YANG Richard 100% 98% 84% 50% 16% 2% -
98 STATEN-LUSTY Silas J. 100% 99% 93% 71% 33% 8% 1%
99 HOLZ Daniel 100% 95% 72% 35% 9% 1% -
100 BARTOLO Domenic V. 100% 99% 89% 61% 24% 4% -
101 BREIER Satchel E. 100% 99% 88% 60% 25% 4% -
102 CORNEJO Jeffrey A. 100% 78% 32% 5% - - -
103 JOHNSON Langston C. 100% 93% 68% 34% 10% 2% -
104 KOTOV Leonid 100% 88% 53% 19% 4% - -
105 LUEBBE Macklan C 100% 94% 69% 33% 9% 1% -
106 REN Richard 100% 74% 31% 7% 1% - -
107 BEAM David E. 100% 89% 57% 22% 4% - -
108 WIND Nicky E. 100% 99% 90% 65% 29% 6% -
109 EICHHORN Lukas H. 100% 80% 40% 12% 2% - -
110 REYES Xavier M. 100% 94% 69% 30% 6% -
111 ATANASSOV Vasil V. 100% 85% 48% 15% 3% - -
112 LIANG Connor 100% 100% 97% 82% 47% 14% 2%
113 HOLZ William A. 100% 84% 38% 9% 1% - -
114 HAST Kern R. 100% 99% 90% 64% 29% 6% -
114 MERCHANT Marcel J. 100% 100% 99% 91% 69% 35% 8%
116 SILBERZWEIG Jordan H. 100% 100% 100% 96% 77% 33%
117 HO Kaden M. 100% 95% 73% 39% 13% 2% -
118 LUO George F. 100% 83% 44% 12% 2% -
118 TONG ZACHARY 100% 94% 71% 35% 10% 2% -
120 JINICH Ilan R. 100% 94% 68% 30% 6% - -
121 BERGER Oliver 100% 97% 79% 47% 17% 4% -
121 CHANG Colin S. 100% 73% 32% 8% 1% - -
123 PAN Jerry 100% 95% 74% 40% 14% 3% -
124 NIL Michael Y. 100% 95% 76% 42% 14% 2% -
124 HAN Daniel Y. 100% 89% 56% 22% 4% - -
124 BARBER Brendan 100% 88% 53% 20% 4% - -
127 CHAN Matthew 100% 96% 80% 48% 18% 3% -
127 LIU kelly 100% 91% 61% 26% 6% - -
129 FALLICK Ozzie 100% 97% 83% 50% 18% 3% -
130 MICHELL Bailey 100% 97% 79% 47% 17% 3% -
130 FREYRE DE ANDRADE Elian R. 100% 89% 55% 21% 4% - -
132 PAN Andrew W. 100% 84% 46% 14% 2% - -
132 BASALYGA Jeffrey 100% 99% 90% 66% 33% 10% 1%
134 WANG Robert 100% 48% 11% 1% - - -
135 COVINGTON Max G. 100% 92% 64% 27% 5% - -
136 LASORSA Matthew 100% 98% 83% 51% 19% 3% -
137 BEITEL Noah 100% 74% 32% 7% 1% - -
137 ALTIRS Alexander 100% 92% 65% 28% 6% 1% -
139 CHEN Howard 100% 100% 95% 78% 44% 14% 2%
140 LEE Aydan J. 100% 63% 19% 3% - -
141 WOODWARD Dylan P. 100% 95% 73% 37% 10% 1% -
142 XU William 100% 91% 63% 27% 6% - -
143 XU Andrew 100% 77% 37% 10% 1% - -
144 GHAYALOD ansh 100% 81% 44% 14% 3% - -
145 YUN Jake 100% 95% 70% 31% 7% 1% -
146 ERMAKOV Lev 100% 97% 79% 45% 15% 2% -
147 SAKHAMURI Surya 100% 100% 96% 82% 52% 20% 3%
148 BUENAVENTURA Christian 100% 100% 97% 83% 52% 19% 3%
149 XU Luke 100% 87% 53% 19% 4% - -
150 SCHERER Max 100% 70% 23% 3% - - -
151 WOODWARD Connor 100% 95% 72% 34% 9% 1% -
152 GHENEA George Philipe 100% 87% 51% 17% 3% - -
153 LE Hayden 100% 98% 85% 52% 18% 3% -
154 QIU Nathan 100% 86% 50% 16% 3% - -
155 RAJA Arnav 100% 94% 71% 37% 12% 2% -
156 SHIRPAL Oleksandr 100% 97% 80% 45% 14% 2% -
157 GREENBAUM Ian L. 100% 91% 56% 15% 2% - -
158 ROSBERG Dashiell W. 100% 88% 51% 17% 3% - -
159 CHEONG Heonjae 100% 90% 59% 22% 4% - -
160 HUANG Zekai 100% 49% 10% 1% - - -
161 YANG Ziyi 100% 92% 64% 28% 7% 1% -
161 STONE Esmond A. 100% 89% 56% 21% 4% - -
161 MARGULIES William 100% 79% 40% 11% 2% - -
164 MURZYN III CJ 100% 83% 44% 13% 2% -
165 BIERNACKI Maciej L. 100% 100% 99% 90% 64% 28% 5%
165 MAKLIN Edward P. 100% 83% 44% 13% 2% - -
165 VO Minh Q. 100% 64% 22% 4% - - -

Explanation

The heatmap in this table provides a visual representation of the victory probability distribution for each fencer in their respective pools:

This heatmap visualization offers an immediate understanding of each fencer's expected performance compared to their actual results.