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.

Cobra Challenge SYC/RCC/Y8

Y-12 Men's Foil

Friday, November 24, 2023 at 8:00 AM

Meadowlands Expo Center - Secaucus, NJ, 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 LI Bradley - - - - 1% 19% 80%
2 CHENG Logan - - - 1% 10% 36% 53%
3 LU Alex - - - 3% 17% 44% 36%
3 CHEN kenneth 1% 6% 23% 36% 26% 8% 1%
5 CHEN Hanson - - - 1% 7% 34% 58%
6 LU Jingyi - - 1% 9% 29% 41% 19%
7 MO Ethan - - 3% 15% 41% 41%
8 KO Caleb - 1% 9% 28% 40% 21%
9 CHANG Jonathan - - - 1% 10% 37% 51%
10 XIAN kevin - - 2% 12% 31% 38% 17%
11 YANG Charles - - - 2% 13% 41% 44%
12 CHANG Eric Jonathan - - 1% 5% 21% 43% 31%
13 CHANG Jeremy - - 2% 12% 31% 38% 18%
14 FANG Haoyu - 1% 7% 25% 41% 26%
15 DOELL Ethan - - - 1% 8% 35% 56%
16 GE Felix Fei - 1% 7% 23% 35% 26% 7%
17 PARK William - - 1% 7% 27% 42% 23%
18 CZARNECKI Thomas - 4% 18% 34% 31% 12% 1%
19 ZHAO Ryan - - 3% 15% 36% 35% 10%
20 ZHANG Gavin - 1% 7% 24% 36% 25% 6%
21 KINGSLEY Griffin - 1% 9% 30% 41% 18% 1%
22 TOOMRE Kai - - 1% 9% 30% 40% 19%
23 LI Lucas - 1% 5% 19% 35% 30% 10%
24 NABASSOUA Djibril 1% 5% 18% 33% 30% 12% 1%
25 HUA Aaron - 1% 7% 22% 35% 27% 8%
26 ZHANG Hanru - - 3% 16% 36% 34% 11%
27 KUO Phineas - 3% 15% 33% 34% 14% 2%
28 BAI Austin - 5% 19% 36% 31% 9%
29 PAN Ethan 2% 13% 30% 33% 18% 4%
30 XU Nathan - 1% 6% 22% 39% 27% 6%
31 JIN Andy - 3% 14% 31% 33% 16% 3%
32 YAVENDITTI William 2% 14% 33% 33% 15% 3%
33 REN Ryan 1% 8% 25% 35% 24% 6%
34 HUYNH Matthew - - 1% 10% 33% 42% 14%
35 ZHUANG Disheng (Eddie) - 1% 9% 26% 36% 23% 5%
36 ZHAO Nathan - - - 1% 7% 35% 57%
37 ZHENG Marcus - - - 4% 19% 43% 35%
38 GRIGORIEV Michael - - 3% 16% 34% 34% 12%
39 QIAN Zekai - 3% 13% 31% 34% 16% 3%
40 LEE Thomas - 2% 13% 34% 36% 14% 1%
41 LIU Alex - - 3% 18% 42% 34% 3%
42 ZHAI Alex - 2% 12% 32% 35% 16% 2%
43 CHANG Parker 2% 13% 31% 34% 17% 3%
44 GUGALA Frank 2% 15% 35% 33% 13% 1%
45 NOVIKOV Yann - - 5% 19% 37% 30% 9%
46 WANG Tiger - 1% 6% 20% 37% 29% 8%
47 TAN Charlie - - 3% 16% 37% 36% 8%
48 WU Wallace - - 4% 21% 40% 30% 5%
49 JAZWINSKI Ryan - 1% 7% 24% 36% 26% 7%
50 XIE Jayden - 2% 12% 33% 38% 14% 1%
51 ULYSSE Jacob - 2% 14% 35% 35% 13% 1%
52 TANG Royce 1% 6% 22% 36% 27% 8%
53 SHIN Noah 4% 20% 35% 28% 11% 2%
54 WANG Ancen - 1% 11% 32% 38% 16% 2%
55 YANG Steve - 2% 12% 32% 37% 15% 1%
56 MA Matthew 1% 10% 30% 35% 19% 4% -
57 KIM Gene - - 3% 15% 34% 35% 12%
58 BAS Jonathan 1% 10% 31% 36% 18% 4% -
59 ZENG Albert 2% 13% 32% 34% 16% 3% -
60 PAN Howard Haoran 1% 12% 31% 33% 17% 4% -
61 ARORA Maximilian Andras A. 4% 25% 37% 25% 8% 1% -
62 LEE Joshua 2% 13% 31% 33% 17% 4% -
63 OH Joshua 1% 10% 30% 36% 18% 4% -
63 KIM Daniel 3% 24% 40% 25% 7% 1% -
65 LI Jayden 3% 18% 34% 30% 12% 2%
66 HOU Gaven - 5% 20% 35% 30% 10%
67 CHEN Steven - - 4% 16% 34% 34% 11%
68 ZHANG Ethan 2% 13% 31% 34% 17% 4% -
69 BHARDWAJ Ranbir 2% 14% 35% 34% 13% 2% -
70 PLUMMER Waylon - - 2% 13% 31% 37% 16%
71 MAZAHERI Theodore 5% 24% 37% 26% 8% 1%
72 TANG Michael 4% 22% 39% 26% 8% 1% -
73 SIU Max 1% 11% 30% 34% 19% 5% -
73 CAO Joshua 3% 19% 36% 29% 11% 2% -
75 BEYDOUN Sam 3% 16% 32% 31% 15% 3% -
76 JI Derek - 4% 22% 41% 27% 6% -
77 HAN Jiaren 1% 12% 32% 35% 16% 3% -
78 MURDOCK Koichi 6% 25% 36% 24% 7% 1% -
79 WANG Caleb 1% 5% 18% 33% 30% 12% 1%
80 KIAYIAS Alexander 9% 33% 36% 18% 4% - -
81 LEE Aeden 15% 42% 32% 10% 1% - -
82 KOVACS Harrison 1% 10% 27% 35% 22% 5%
83 WATERFIELD Lysander 1% 11% 29% 35% 19% 4%
84 SAMUEL Lucas 1% 6% 23% 38% 27% 5%
85 HU Daniel 20% 39% 29% 10% 2% -
86 PAN Jason 7% 26% 36% 23% 7% 1%
87 KIAYIAS Anthony 9% 31% 36% 19% 5% -
88 ZHOU Alex 1% 6% 24% 36% 25% 8% 1%
89 YOUM Tyson 18% 41% 31% 9% 1% - -
90 SUN Nathan - 4% 16% 34% 32% 13% 1%
91 ZHAI Derrick - 1% 7% 24% 38% 26% 5%
91 HUANG Jinyao - 2% 13% 31% 35% 16% 2%
93 QU Zhida (richard) - 1% 6% 22% 35% 28% 8%
94 ZHENG Lerui - 4% 21% 38% 28% 8% 1%
95 DANTON Ryan - 5% 21% 35% 28% 10% 1%
95 LIN Qianzhong 11% 30% 34% 19% 5% 1% -
97 LU Hansen 2% 11% 29% 34% 18% 5% -
98 BRADFORD-WATT Ezra 4% 26% 41% 23% 6% 1% -
99 LIU jeremy 16% 37% 31% 13% 3% - -
100 ZHONG Kingsley 13% 40% 33% 12% 2% - -
101 GREULICH Nikolas 5% 24% 41% 24% 6% 1% -
102 XU Jason 3% 21% 41% 27% 7% 1% -
103 SHI Luke 35% 44% 17% 3% - - -
104 HUANG Anthony 8% 31% 37% 19% 4% - -
105 SHAW Eric 1% 9% 27% 36% 22% 5%
106 HU Michael 29% 42% 22% 6% 1% -
107 EVANS Desmond 1% 11% 30% 36% 18% 3%
108 WANG Mendy 1% 7% 23% 35% 26% 8%
109 WU Silin 2% 11% 30% 35% 19% 4%
110 YUNG Zak 19% 39% 30% 10% 2% -
111 CHOI Hunter 30% 41% 22% 6% 1% -
112 KEEGAN Cole 3% 18% 34% 30% 13% 2%
113 ZHENG Austin 10% 29% 34% 20% 6% 1% -
114 BRAIZINHA David 12% 33% 35% 16% 4% - -
114 SHEN Lucas 6% 26% 37% 24% 7% 1% -
116 MAZAHERI John 4% 19% 35% 29% 11% 2% -
117 WU Alexander 25% 41% 25% 8% 1% - -
118 AMR HOSSNY Adam 1% 11% 32% 36% 16% 3% -
119 LU Baisu 33% 42% 20% 4% - - -
120 LIU Brady 37% 43% 17% 3% - - -
121 LEE Kyle 23% 40% 27% 8% 1% - -
122 TIAN Andy 29% 44% 22% 5% - - -
123 AHMAD Uzayr 1% 11% 30% 34% 19% 5% 1%
124 GRIGORYAN Erik 21% 39% 28% 10% 2% -
125 KUBBA Krish 16% 41% 31% 10% 2% - -
126 HUANG Marcus 51% 39% 10% 1% - - -
127 FUNG Jace Y. 26% 45% 23% 5% - - -
128 HUYNH Kaleb 13% 38% 34% 13% 2% - -
129 MANCHALA Vedanth 4% 22% 37% 27% 9% 1% -
130 WANG Luke 1% 10% 26% 34% 22% 6% 1%
131 MOON Nicolas 11% 41% 35% 11% 1% - -
132 TIAN Dylan 52% 37% 10% 1% - - -
133 HUA Isaac 24% 44% 25% 6% 1% - -
134 RAJAT Rivaan 55% 36% 9% 1% - - -
135 FANG Ryan 7% 27% 37% 22% 6% 1%
136 CHEN Ethan 1% 12% 33% 35% 15% 3% -
136 DENG Jonathan 7% 27% 37% 22% 6% 1% -
138 KIM Ethan 41% 41% 15% 3% - - -
138 PANG Owen 44% 41% 13% 2% - - -
138 DAVIDSON Henry 45% 41% 12% 2% - - -
141 ALVAREZ Francisco Janusz < 1% 2% 14% 35% 34% 13% 2%
142 YU Nolan 64% 31% 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.