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.

The Fencing Center SYC

Y-14 Men's Foil

Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 8:00 AM

The Fencing Center - San Jose, CA, 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 SADOVSKY Leor B. - - - 4% 17% 41% 38%
2 KRYLTSOV Michael - - - 2% 18% 47% 32%
3 SHEN Owen - - 2% 12% 36% 39% 11%
3 SISINNI Riccardo - - 2% 12% 34% 39% 13%
5 MARTIN IV Elmer D. - - - 1% 14% 57% 28%
6 KANG Anthony - - - 10% 43% 47%
7 KIM Aiden - 1% 5% 18% 36% 31% 9%
8 KIM Andrew J. - - - 2% 14% 41% 43%
9 CO Dylan - - 1% 10% 32% 42% 15%
10 NAYGAS LAWRENCE I. - - - 1% 7% 33% 60%
11 MA Andrew - - - 3% 17% 43% 37%
12 XU Jia Bao (Bowen) - - - 1% 10% 42% 48%
13 FUKUDA Diego - 2% 10% 27% 35% 21% 5%
14 RASMUSSEN Sage 3% 15% 31% 32% 16% 3%
15 LEE Dylan - 3% 19% 37% 30% 10% 1%
16 SHAGIDANYAN German - - 4% 25% 47% 21% 3%
17 SOTO-ULEV Aden A. - 1% 7% 29% 42% 21%
18 ZHANG Jiening G. - - 1% 5% 22% 42% 30%
19 LING Eddie - - 6% 23% 39% 27% 6%
20 COELHO Cristiano P. - - - - 5% 39% 56%
21 LIPPMAN Sam - 1% 9% 25% 35% 24% 6%
22 NGUYEN martin 1% 9% 26% 34% 22% 6% 1%
23 WU Alber Y. - - 3% 14% 32% 36% 16%
24 LI Matthew - 2% 10% 28% 37% 20% 2%
25 LLIDO Soren 1% 6% 21% 35% 28% 9%
26 HOSKERI Anik S. - - 3% 14% 32% 36% 15%
27 KIM Ryan Y. - - - 5% 27% 49% 20%
28 LI Samuel 2% 13% 30% 33% 18% 4% -
29 KIAYIAS Aris - 2% 12% 29% 35% 18% 3%
30 LO Preston 3% 17% 33% 31% 14% 2%
31 MAO Lucas - 1% 8% 27% 40% 21% 3%
32 PARK Rion 4% 21% 35% 28% 10% 2% -
33 PARK Sky 2% 12% 29% 33% 19% 5% 1%
34 CHOI Ethan - - - 3% 18% 43% 35%
35 ZHANG Aaron - - 2% 26% 51% 21%
36 WONG Evan 4% 22% 42% 25% 6% 1%
37 MA Bryant - 1% 9% 28% 38% 21% 3%
38 RUBIN Max - 1% 9% 30% 39% 19% 3%
39 LI Richard - 7% 28% 40% 21% 3% -
40 LYNCH Owen C. - 1% 9% 28% 38% 20% 3%
41 AGRAWAL Niki 3% 15% 32% 31% 15% 3% -
42 WU Lucas - - 8% 46% 38% 8%
43 MORROW Brenden - 1% 11% 34% 39% 15%
44 GRIFFITH MCALLISTER Thomas - 3% 16% 38% 34% 8% -
45 TSAY Jordan R. 2% 12% 32% 36% 16% 2% -
46 LEE Christopher T. - - 4% 16% 34% 33% 12%
47 DERRICK Blake 1% 5% 20% 34% 29% 11% 1%
48 FANG Jaden 1% 12% 31% 35% 17% 3% -
49 KIM Daniel Y. - 6% 25% 43% 22% 4% -
50 WU Alistair 6% 26% 38% 23% 6% - -
51 TONKOVICH Ryan 3% 16% 33% 31% 14% 3% -
52 CHAN Connor 24% 44% 26% 5% - - -
53 YI William 15% 35% 32% 15% 3% -
54 SENIC Lucas - 1% 10% 34% 40% 15%
55 RANJITH Yash M. 3% 17% 33% 31% 14% 3%
56 CHUN Dashel 7% 38% 48% 7% - -
57 PALMA Nathan Anthony - 4% 15% 31% 31% 16% 3%
58 UHLIG Cole 1% 10% 29% 38% 20% 2% -
59 YUE Jackson 4% 37% 39% 16% 3% - -
60 CORTRIGHT Skipper - 1% 5% 19% 37% 31% 7%
61 LIU William 2% 13% 31% 33% 17% 4% -
62 NICOLETTI Luca 1% 8% 24% 35% 25% 7%
63 ZHOU Ryan 16% 41% 33% 9% 1% - -
64 WONG Jacob W. 12% 34% 34% 16% 4% - -
65 BORG Matthew - 3% 15% 36% 33% 12% 1%
66 PONS Diego 3% 17% 33% 31% 14% 3% -
67 HIRAMOTO Satoshi 1% 12% 35% 35% 14% 2% -
68 PARK Ryan 13% 40% 36% 10% 1% - -
69 LAM Nicolas 1% 11% 32% 37% 16% 3% -
70 NGAI Julian 1% 7% 23% 34% 25% 9% 1%
71 KAREHT Kai 34% 42% 19% 4% - - -
72 SCHIENEMAN Valentine 8% 29% 37% 21% 5% - -
73 CHOI Ethan 8% 28% 35% 21% 6% 1% -
74 LUI Jake 13% 33% 34% 16% 4% - -
75 LU Kevin 3% 17% 34% 31% 13% 2% -
76 SONG Matthew 3% 29% 41% 22% 5% - -
77 LE Jacob 30% 46% 20% 3% - -
78 ONG William 21% 50% 27% 2% - -
79 MANIKTALA Suvir 18% 38% 30% 12% 2% - -
80 GORDON William L. 16% 36% 32% 14% 3% - -
81 PERKINS Jaray 1% 9% 26% 34% 22% 7% 1%
82 UPENDER West 22% 46% 26% 6% 1% - -
83 SAH Steven 11% 32% 34% 18% 4% 1% -
84 JIANG Yehong 21% 42% 28% 8% 1% - -
85 ZHANG Graham 6% 27% 41% 21% 5% - -
86 BHOBE Arjun 24% 43% 26% 7% 1% - -
87 DULAI Angad - 10% 33% 36% 17% 3% -
88 FLIGOR William 28% 46% 22% 4% - -
89 TULYAG Azim 6% 26% 37% 24% 7% 1% -
89 CHAN Joseph 21% 41% 28% 9% 1% - -
91 BANUELOS Dario 48% 43% 9% - - -
92 HOM Logan 48% 38% 12% 2% - - -
93 LIANG Ethan 80% 18% 1% - - - -
93 JEONG Taewoo 31% 46% 19% 3% - - -
95 FOY Grant 61% 33% 6% - - - -

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.