June NAC

Div I Men's Saber

Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 8:15 AM

, - Richmond, VA, 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 COHEN Josef A. - - - 1% 16% 83%
2 SARON Mitchell S. - - - - 5% 28% 67%
3 DOLEGIEWICZ Filip - - 2% 14% 42% 42%
3 WILLIAMS Nolan E. - 6% 24% 39% 25% 5%
5 SOHN Kevin J. 4% 19% 35% 29% 11% 2%
6 BIVINS III George A. - - 2% 11% 29% 38% 19%
7 LIMB Matthew G. - 1% 10% 36% 43% 10%
8 STONE Ben - 4% 17% 34% 33% 12%
9 BOOTH Zaheer - - - 3% 19% 43% 34%
10 SMITH Jared C. - - 3% 17% 43% 37%
11 YEN Darren - 1% 7% 27% 44% 22%
12 BASALYGA Jeffrey 1% 8% 27% 40% 22% 1%
13 JI Cody Walter 1% 7% 22% 33% 26% 10% 1%
14 TE VELDE Noah C. - 1% 9% 27% 40% 22%
15 MOON Sean H. - 1% 6% 20% 33% 29% 10%
16 WALKER Christopher J. - - - < 1% 6% 30% 64%
17 SOLOMON Daniel P. - - - 5% 22% 43% 29%
18 NOBLE Daniel 8% 27% 36% 22% 6% 1%
19 CHOI HYUNSEOK - - 2% 12% 34% 38% 13%
20 DHINGRA Gian K. 1% 5% 17% 30% 29% 15% 3%
21 ATTIG Will T. 1% 6% 22% 36% 28% 8%
22 BURGUNDER Quinten (Quin) A. - 1% 6% 26% 43% 24%
23 KUSHKOV Simon O. - 5% 23% 39% 27% 5%
24 LILOV Neil - 2% 9% 26% 36% 23% 5%
25 JOHNSON Zachary (Zack) C. - - 2% 12% 34% 38% 14%
25 LINSKY Matthew 1% 8% 26% 37% 22% 5% -
27 JEFFORDS Alexander 1% 11% 30% 34% 19% 4% -
28 HU William 1% 10% 27% 36% 22% 5%
29 BARNETT Adam 1% 6% 24% 38% 25% 5%
30 LIM Sanha 6% 23% 34% 25% 10% 2% -
31 ARMIJO Gabriel K. - - 3% 17% 42% 38%
32 CZAHA Balint 14% 35% 33% 15% 3% -
33 LINDER James (Luke) L. - - - - 4% 28% 68%
33 GEFELL Andrew P. - 4% 15% 30% 31% 16% 3%
35 ANGLADE Junior Ronald (RJ) E. - - 4% 16% 35% 34% 11%
36 KIM Avery J. - 5% 19% 34% 29% 11% 1%
37 SINGER Carson 1% 6% 22% 37% 27% 7%
38 MCBRIDE Jackson R. - 3% 15% 33% 34% 14%
39 BIERNACKI Maciej L. - 1% 10% 33% 41% 15%
40 VIDOVSZKY Robert T. - - - 6% 35% 58%
41 LIANG Connor - 4% 19% 38% 31% 8%
42 WOOD Elden S. 1% 8% 26% 36% 23% 5%
43 SAKHAMURI Surya - 4% 17% 35% 33% 12%
44 CHAYEVSKY Kirk - 3% 20% 45% 28% 4%
45 TRAVERS Samir T. 1% 12% 32% 37% 16% 2%
46 ROBERTS Sam 9% 33% 39% 16% 3% -
47 BARTOLO Domenic V. 4% 28% 41% 22% 5% -
48 MORREALE John 6% 22% 33% 25% 11% 3% -
49 BENAVRAM Lev C. - 1% 8% 25% 38% 23% 4%
50 BARBER William S. 14% 41% 33% 11% 1% -
51 MEHTA Sachin N. - 4% 19% 39% 30% 7%
52 BOLTON Braydon A. 1% 8% 28% 38% 22% 4%
53 BUENAVENTURA Christian 1% 9% 26% 35% 23% 6%
54 LIU kelly 14% 37% 34% 13% 2% -
55 DROZ Camden J. 2% 14% 34% 34% 14% 2%
56 GREENBAUM Maxwell H. 1% 5% 20% 36% 29% 9%
57 SHI Andrew 2% 13% 31% 33% 16% 3%
58 CALLAHAN Jaden P. 1% 5% 19% 34% 30% 11% 1%
59 KONOVALOV Evgeniy - 1% 6% 20% 34% 29% 10%
60 DODRILL Grant 1% 6% 19% 32% 28% 12% 2%
61 LIN John A. 1% 6% 19% 31% 27% 13% 2%
61 JINICH Ilan R. 36% 41% 18% 4% - - -
63 YUN Jake 15% 36% 32% 13% 3% -
64 KARAM Tariq A. - - 4% 20% 44% 33%
65 HARLEY Colby A. - - 4% 18% 42% 36%
66 KULDELL Spencer D. - 3% 17% 41% 31% 7%
67 MORRILL Justin 9% 33% 37% 17% 3% -
68 PORTMANN Stein J. 12% 34% 35% 16% 4% -
69 HARVEY Nicholas J. - 3% 11% 26% 33% 22% 6%
70 HAMMERSTROM Jared - 4% 17% 33% 32% 12% 1%
70 MAHONEY Colin M. 2% 11% 29% 34% 19% 4% -
72 KUPANOFF Dimitri N. - 1% 7% 24% 38% 25% 5%
73 HUSSAIN Faaris 1% 7% 21% 32% 26% 11% 2%
74 ZU Kevin - 2% 11% 27% 34% 21% 5%
75 DANNULL Lukas J. - 5% 19% 32% 29% 13% 2%
76 MICHELL Bailey 1% 9% 23% 32% 24% 9% 1%
77 WIND Nicky E. 1% 7% 22% 34% 27% 9% 1%
78 XU Luke 19% 38% 29% 11% 2% - -
79 HOLMES Aiden G. 3% 15% 32% 32% 15% 3% -
80 SUBBIAH Prashanth V. 3% 20% 38% 30% 9% -
80 BRAR Sanjeet 18% 43% 31% 7% 1% -
82 SMITH David C. 2% 14% 31% 33% 16% 3%
83 CHAN Matthew 6% 24% 37% 25% 8% 1%
84 KOGAN Benjamin 13% 39% 36% 10% 1% -
85 FREYRE DE ANDRADE Elian R. 29% 42% 23% 5% - -
85 KIM Andrew H. 21% 39% 28% 10% 2% -
87 CHENEY Christopher (Chris) M. 1% 11% 32% 36% 17% 3%
87 TANN Justin 19% 41% 30% 9% 1% -
89 FENG Leo 22% 40% 27% 9% 1% -
90 WALKER III Alex 1% 8% 25% 36% 24% 6%
91 BERGER Oliver 4% 20% 35% 28% 10% 1%
92 LE Hayden 6% 25% 37% 24% 7% 1%
93 QUAN Nicholas 2% 11% 28% 34% 20% 5% -
94 RICE Vaughn A. - 5% 19% 34% 30% 11% 1%
95 RAI Avin 3% 16% 32% 30% 15% 3% -
96 MORRILL William 2% 12% 29% 33% 19% 5% 1%
97 SHEPANEK Noah M. - 4% 17% 34% 31% 12% 1%
98 ZHOU Justin 2% 12% 29% 33% 19% 5% -
99 ESCUETA Tony V. 5% 24% 38% 25% 7% 1% -
100 REN Richard 25% 40% 26% 8% 1% - -
101 HAZLE-CARY Jacob P. 5% 22% 35% 26% 10% 2% -
101 JOHNSON Langston C. 19% 37% 29% 12% 3% - -
103 YOUNG Nash - 3% 14% 31% 34% 16% 2%
104 GREEN IV James (Bud) 6% 27% 37% 23% 7% 1% -
105 WESLER Logan A. 19% 39% 30% 11% 2% - -
106 ALTIRS Alexander 6% 24% 36% 25% 8% 1% -
107 BOLTON Dawson E. 1% 6% 22% 35% 26% 9% 1%
107 GAFFNEY John M. 33% 41% 20% 5% 1% - -
109 HOUTZ Jackson 3% 16% 34% 32% 13% 2% -
110 DU Gavin J. 20% 41% 29% 9% 1% - -
111 POPE Nico 3% 15% 29% 30% 17% 5% 1%
112 YUN Jaesun 4% 19% 33% 28% 13% 3% -
113 WILSON Jude 1% 7% 21% 32% 26% 11% 2%
114 CORNEJO Jeffrey A. 12% 34% 35% 16% 3% - -
115 JARAMILLO Tobias L. 2% 19% 39% 30% 8% 1%
116 XU William 23% 44% 27% 6% 1% -
117 ZHOU Matthew R. - 4% 17% 35% 33% 12%
118 JOHNSON Andrew J. - 2% 11% 33% 40% 14%
118 TONG ZACHARY 15% 38% 33% 12% 2% -
120 JEAN Noe T. 2% 14% 34% 34% 14% 2%
121 WOODWARD Connor 18% 40% 31% 10% 1% -
122 LAI Adam J. 3% 15% 32% 32% 15% 3%
123 CHIN Matthew W. 14% 35% 33% 15% 3% -
124 SKEETE Kamar A. - 1% 7% 24% 41% 27%
124 YANG Ziyi 4% 22% 38% 28% 8% -
126 LI Joshua L. 20% 43% 29% 7% 1% -
127 MOLINA Nicholas (Nico) G. 9% 30% 36% 19% 5% -
128 NIL Michael Y. 11% 34% 37% 16% 3% -
129 RAJA Arnav 6% 26% 39% 24% 5% -
130 GANTA Vijay 11% 32% 35% 17% 4% -
131 CZYZEWSKI Konrad R. 5% 23% 37% 26% 8% 1% -
132 BECKER Dylan J. 5% 25% 38% 24% 7% 1% -
133 KAUFMAN Bradley A. 2% 12% 27% 31% 20% 7% 1%
134 LINDHOLM Oliver S. 20% 40% 29% 10% 1% - -
135 CAI Lawrence (Larry) 2% 13% 30% 33% 18% 4%
136 HARRIS Alex K. 8% 31% 38% 19% 4% -
137 COLE Alexander 24% 45% 26% 5% - -
137 BEITEL Noah 58% 34% 7% 1% - -
139 RESHEIDAT Malik 36% 43% 17% 3% - -
140 CHANG Eliot A. 18% 40% 30% 10% 1% - -
141 SCHARDINE Ryan 37% 42% 17% 3% - -

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.