The future of US Fencing is at stake!

For transparency, fairness, and athlete support, VOTE NOW for:
(1) Maria Panyi, (2) Andrey Geva, (3) Igor Chirashnya, and (4) Sue Moheb.

March NAC and Parafencing National Championships

Y-10 Men's Foil

Friday, March 3, 2023 at 2:00 PM

Fort Worth, TX, USA

Probability density of pool victories

Reset

Explore the pool victory probability density 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 ZHOU Chenqiao - - - - 8% 50% 42%
2 YANG Charles - - - 1% 10% 39% 50%
3 ZHAO Nathan - - - - 5% 29% 66%
3 HOU Gaven - 1% 5% 17% 34% 32% 12%
5 FUKUDA Brando - - - 4% 18% 42% 35%
6 MAZAHERI Fletcher - 1% 6% 22% 36% 28% 8%
7 JAZWINSKI Ryan - - 3% 14% 32% 36% 15%
8 TANG Royce - 2% 13% 33% 37% 15%
9 DESERANNO Leander - - - 1% 7% 32% 60%
10 YU ShiYu (Henry) - - 2% 12% 31% 38% 17%
11 ZHOU Shawn - - 2% 15% 44% 40%
12 WANG Tiger - 1% 7% 25% 42% 25%
13 CHEN Hanson - - - 1% 8% 35% 56%
14 YU ShiLin (Harry) - 3% 14% 33% 35% 14% 1%
15 XIE Jayden - - 4% 18% 38% 33% 6%
16 LEE Jaehee - - - 4% 19% 43% 33%
17 PLUMMER Waylon - 1% 11% 33% 39% 15%
18 GE Felix Fei - 1% 8% 27% 38% 21% 4%
19 CHANG Jeremy - - 1% 8% 30% 44% 17%
20 HUANG Jinyao - 3% 16% 35% 34% 11%
21 SHAW eric - 3% 20% 38% 29% 9% 1%
22 HONG Edwin 1% 9% 26% 35% 23% 6% -
23 GRIGORIEV Michael - 1% 5% 18% 34% 31% 11%
23 LIM EUNSEONG - - 4% 23% 41% 27% 5%
25 KUANG Cyrus - 3% 13% 30% 35% 18% 2%
26 KIAYIAS Alexander 1% 10% 28% 35% 21% 5% -
27 YOU Alan - 1% 6% 28% 46% 19%
28 QU Zhida (richard) - 1% 6% 25% 43% 25%
29 LU Hansen - 2% 11% 29% 36% 19% 2%
30 ZHAI Alex 2% 14% 31% 32% 16% 3% -
31 ALANAZI Saif 1% 8% 23% 33% 25% 9% 1%
32 WANG Elijah (QiChen) 2% 14% 32% 32% 16% 4% -
33 DANTON Ryan - - 4% 21% 41% 28% 5%
34 REN Ryan - - 2% 12% 30% 37% 18%
35 CZARNECKI Thomas 1% 11% 33% 36% 17% 3%
36 RAU Shogun - 6% 24% 39% 25% 5%
37 YANG Steve 1% 8% 29% 41% 19% 3%
38 TSUI Raedyn Ho Hin - - 4% 18% 37% 32% 9%
39 CHEN Jason - 5% 19% 34% 28% 11% 2%
40 CHEN Ryker - 3% 13% 32% 36% 15% 1%
40 RAMKUMAR Eeshan 1% 9% 26% 36% 22% 6% -
42 HUYNH Matthew - 3% 13% 31% 35% 16% 2%
43 ZENG Albert 1% 8% 24% 34% 24% 8% 1%
44 WATERFIELD Lysander - 2% 12% 32% 38% 16%
45 KO Darren 3% 20% 38% 29% 9% 1%
46 HE Ian - 6% 27% 38% 23% 5% -
47 CHOI Hunter 1% 10% 46% 33% 9% 1% -
48 YANG Tate - 4% 16% 31% 31% 15% 3%
49 ALVAREZ Francisco Janusz 26% 42% 25% 7% 1% - -
50 AMR HOSSNY Adam 2% 13% 35% 33% 14% 2% -
51 KIM Gene 1% 10% 27% 35% 22% 6% -
52 KIAYIAS Anthony 3% 15% 32% 32% 16% 3% -
53 WU Wallace 1% 11% 32% 36% 18% 3%
54 QIAN Henry 1% 8% 26% 38% 23% 5%
55 MAZAHERI Theodore 19% 44% 29% 7% 1% -
56 ZHANG Aiden 13% 34% 33% 16% 4% - -
57 YAN Rian - 2% 12% 29% 34% 19% 4%
58 QIAN Zekai - 3% 15% 31% 32% 15% 3%
59 FOO Kingston 18% 38% 31% 11% 2% - -
60 YE Jerry 6% 27% 38% 22% 6% 1%
61 ZHAO Jason 3% 19% 39% 30% 9% 1%
62 PARK Andrew 13% 35% 33% 15% 3% - -
63 JIN Xuechong Daniel - 3% 17% 37% 32% 10% 1%
64 TSUI Kaylan Ho Sen 6% 25% 36% 24% 8% 1% -
65 HUA Isaac 40% 45% 13% 2% - - -
66 CHANG Parker 2% 12% 32% 35% 16% 3% -
67 WU Gengze 14% 36% 33% 14% 3% - -
68 JIN Xueyuan George 1% 18% 38% 30% 11% 1%
69 SUAREZ Lucas 2% 11% 28% 34% 20% 5% -
70 SHARMA Ari 14% 36% 33% 14% 3% - -
71 VALENCIA Beryn - 5% 21% 37% 27% 8% 1%
72 LIN George - 2% 20% 38% 29% 10% 1%
73 BERCEN Eli - 1% 10% 36% 38% 14% 1%
74 WILSON Jacob 38% 44% 16% 2% - -
75 LEE Joshua 4% 23% 43% 25% 5% -
76 LI Jayden 15% 40% 33% 11% 2% -
77 SLAIN Owen 10% 30% 35% 19% 5% 1% -
78 LU Baisu 6% 24% 36% 25% 8% 1% -
79 WU James 50% 41% 8% 1% - - -
80 HOARE Gabriel 14% 36% 33% 14% 3% - -
81 HWANG Jayden 14% 36% 33% 14% 3% - -
82 TEOH Liam 41% 41% 15% 3% - - -
83 LEE Leo 1% 7% 23% 34% 25% 9% 1%
84 HWANG Jacob 33% 44% 19% 3% - -
85 MAZAHERI John 16% 38% 32% 12% 2% - -
86 FUNG Tiberias 45% 40% 13% 2% - -
86 PARK Avan 74% 23% 3% - - -
88 PAYNE Lynas 2% 11% 30% 34% 18% 4% -
89 MO Andy 28% 56% 15% 1% - - -
90 MARTIRE Francis 26% 49% 21% 4% - - -
90 ZHONG Albert 26% 40% 25% 8% 1% - -
92 GOVSHTEYN Ari 13% 45% 32% 9% 1% - -
92 MO Shawn 23% 41% 27% 8% 1% - -
94 LI Alexander 12% 33% 35% 17% 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.