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.

Fairfax Challenge SYC

Y-12 Men's Foil

Sunday, April 30, 2017 at 11:30 AM

Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center - Miami, FL, 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 EMMER Chase T. - - - - 2% 21% 77%
2 JANG Jaewon - - 1% 9% 32% 41% 17%
3 LOUIE Timothy J. - - 1% 11% 35% 39% 14%
3 GROSSMAN SMISEK Spencer - - 2% 15% 38% 34% 10%
5 BAUMSTEIN Nicholas I. - - - - 8% 39% 53%
6 GILBERT-GOLDSTEIN Avery E. - 2% 13% 34% 37% 13%
7 AUGUSTINE Ethan A. - - - 1% 9% 37% 54%
8 LAURICELLA Douglas - 4% 17% 33% 32% 13% 1%
9 KASI Sanjay - - 3% 21% 50% 24% 2%
10 CHEN Andrew - - - 2% 16% 45% 37%
11 CHEN Allen 1% 7% 29% 39% 20% 4% -
12 PELOSKY Zack B. 4% 25% 40% 24% 6% 1%
13 WILLIAMS Connor J. 2% 11% 28% 34% 20% 5% -
14 SINGH Dayaal - - 1% 7% 30% 46% 15%
15 ZELJKOVIC Dusan - 4% 24% 45% 24% 4%
16 STANLEY Mason B. - 1% 9% 29% 37% 20% 4%
17 ZHANG Andy W. - - 2% 13% 33% 37% 13%
18 REALS Alden D. - - 2% 13% 32% 37% 16%
19 YU Vinni 1% 6% 20% 33% 27% 11% 2%
19 GRAHAM Roy J. - - 1% 8% 33% 48% 10%
21 BOBROW Logan 1% 8% 25% 36% 23% 6% < 1%
22 FU Samuel Y. - - 1% 6% 25% 42% 25%
23 KIM Nicholas W. - - - - 4% 26% 70%
24 REZNICK Nicholas J. - 1% 7% 33% 44% 15% 1%
26 LEE Chris - - 1% 7% 25% 42% 26%
27 SCHEMBRI MCCORD Kruz - - 3% 17% 39% 34% 7%
28 ROBINSON Keegan B. 10% 31% 36% 19% 4% -
29 LIANG Lixi (Henry) - - 1% 7% 27% 45% 21%
30 ZHANG Henry C. - 4% 14% 28% 31% 18% 4%
31 PAE Jonathan L. - 3% 16% 37% 33% 10% 1%
32 SHA Yi Peng 5% 28% 40% 22% 5% - -
33 HORSLEY Alexander - 1% 7% 33% 45% 14%
34 YEROKHIN Michael N. - - 2% 14% 42% 42%
35 TIAN Aaron C. 1% 10% 31% 39% 17% 3% -
36 WEN George C. - 3% 17% 38% 33% 9% 1%
37 PAE Brian L. - - 4% 20% 41% 32% 3%
38 LYUTIKOV Yegor 3% 21% 38% 28% 9% 1%
39 FEDONCHIK Henry J. 5% 21% 37% 28% 9% 1%
40 MCCORD Clark 17% 39% 32% 11% 2% -
41 ORVANANOS Jorge - 2% 14% 36% 38% 10%
42 KAO Castor T. - 6% 25% 40% 26% 4%
43 LE Vyn A. 14% 42% 33% 10% 1% - -
44 PYO Michael M. 2% 12% 31% 34% 17% 4% -
45 KIM Edward J. 1% 9% 27% 36% 21% 5% -
46 ONIK Elijah T. 8% 26% 34% 23% 8% 1% -
47 TOLBA Abdelrahman - 4% 18% 34% 31% 12% 1%
48 SURINGA William J. 9% 38% 38% 13% 2% - -
49 DAI Jonathan T. - 1% 7% 28% 45% 19%
50 OH Sean 3% 23% 41% 26% 6% -
51 GU Andrew - 4% 19% 37% 30% 10% 1%
53 FURST Matthew C. 12% 38% 36% 13% 2% - -
54 ZELTSER Lawrence M. 6% 29% 44% 20% 2% - -
55 FOGELSON Frederick J. 2% 13% 33% 35% 15% 2% -
56 CASTRO Gabriel D. 1% 5% 17% 31% 29% 14% 3%
57 YAN Edward Tianshuo 2% 13% 34% 36% 14% 1% -
58 KITAGAWA Eric S. 11% 30% 34% 19% 6% 1% -
59 DOCTOR Aidan L. - 2% 9% 24% 35% 24% 6%
60 TAKLE Douglas 2% 14% 33% 33% 15% 3% -
61 ANTON Nathaniel - 1% 10% 29% 39% 20%
62 ZHAO Dylan L. 19% 40% 30% 10% 1% - -
63 SONG Leonardo T. 25% 51% 22% 2% - - -
64 LIU Eric Y. 26% 46% 23% 5% - - -
65 KALIPERSAD Neil A. - - 8% 40% 39% 11% 1%
66 BELLUOMO David C. 19% 45% 28% 7% 1% - -
68 LONG Connor M. 1% 10% 30% 39% 18% 3% -
68 MITCHELL Philip D. 5% 25% 37% 24% 7% 1% -
70 MAK Jeff 13% 34% 33% 16% 4% - -
71 KEE Andrew L. 2% 14% 33% 34% 15% 2% -
73 FOTENOS Noah T. 4% 19% 35% 29% 11% 2% -
74 TRUBETSKI David 5% 21% 35% 27% 10% 1% -
75 ALONSOZANA Andrew G. 6% 24% 36% 25% 8% 1% -
76 BROWN Cullen 14% 45% 32% 8% 1% - -
77 SCHLOSSNAGLE Christopher 12% 36% 35% 14% 3% - -
78 SANDOVAL Connor 19% 44% 29% 7% 1% - -
79 KIM Alexander M. 19% 43% 31% 7% - -
80 BING Charles < 1% 2% 12% 34% 35% 15% 2%
81 GASIOROWSKI Devin G. 10% 41% 37% 11% 1% -
81 KULKARNI Ansh A. 34% 49% 16% 2% - -
83 KAST Quinn J. 9% 30% 36% 19% 5% - -
83 WONG Ethan 9% 49% 33% 8% 1% - -
86 YU Jonathan J. 16% 36% 31% 13% 3% - -
87 TAYLOR Andrew K. 12% 38% 37% 12% 2% - -
87 GAO William 24% 46% 24% 5% - - -

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.