NEUSFA 2022 Pomme De Terre

Senior Men's Foil

Sunday, June 19, 2022 at 8:00 AM

Brandeis University - Waltham, MA, 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 ZHANG Daniel D. - - - 1% 17% 81%
2 LYU Victor - - 5% 26% 41% 24% 3%
3 LIU Patrick - - - 1% 21% 77%
3 WU Alexander - - 2% 14% 42% 42%
5 LI Brandon H. - - - - 10% 90%
6 KAO Castor T. - - - 2% 23% 75%
7 SULLIVAN Jackson R. - - - 7% 35% 58%
8 KLOSTERMANN Max - - 3% 21% 46% 31%
9 LIN Richard W. - - - - 9% 45% 46%
10 LI Richard - - 1% 6% 32% 61%
11 WELCH Kyle J. - - - 1% 9% 37% 54%
12 WU Nicholas - - - 1% 16% 52% 30%
13 LI Owen - - 4% 24% 48% 23%
14 COSTELLO Chaissen F. - - 5% 30% 60% 5%
15 UM Ethan A. - - - 7% 39% 54%
16 BING Charles - - 7% 33% 43% 16%
17 YEROKHIN Michael N. - - 1% 13% 45% 41%
18 JIANG Owen - 5% 25% 40% 25% 5%
19 DU Samuel R. - 1% 11% 33% 40% 15%
20 ZOBEL Eric H. - - 4% 26% 51% 19%
21 DAI Jonathan T. - - 2% 17% 56% 25%
22 GONG Benjamin - - 6% 28% 41% 22% 3%
23 DAUM Charlie 1% 12% 51% 31% 5% -
24 ZHANG Andy W. - - - 5% 39% 56%
24 SCHENCK Koen M. - - 5% 23% 44% 27%
26 LIN James G. - 1% 7% 31% 52% 10%
27 HOWARD Michael - 8% 30% 38% 20% 4%
28 ACHILOV Sayid 1% 6% 23% 39% 27% 4%
29 SACCOCCIO Nicholas P. - - 3% 21% 46% 30%
30 SHIN Joshua J. 1% 6% 25% 41% 24% 4%
31 SIMA Congyu Josh 1% 9% 40% 39% 11% 1%
32 LI Eric - 1% 10% 36% 44% 9%
33 DOBBINS Evan W. - 1% 9% 32% 41% 17%
34 ADLER David R. - - 6% 33% 44% 17%
35 TSAI Max W. 4% 24% 40% 25% 6% -
36 MCLEAN Miles K. - 8% 36% 44% 10% 1%
37 DESANDO Michael R. - - 6% 34% 51% 8%
38 LIU Jinning - 6% 27% 43% 21% 3%
39 DENG Kenny 34% 45% 18% 3% < 1% - -
40 BREIER Matthew F. - 1% 10% 37% 40% 13%
41 MIALL Steven A. - 4% 25% 49% 20% 1%
42 DEGREMONT Henri S. - 2% 22% 50% 24% 3%
43 MENG Zhaoyi - 11% 46% 37% 6% -
44 TEMPLE Jackson - 3% 20% 42% 29% 6%
45 BOLAÑOS CAMACHO Alejandro - 1% 10% 30% 40% 19%
46 XIAO Anthony - 3% 20% 45% 30% 2%
46 LIN Michael - 3% 19% 44% 31% 2%
48 WANG Mason 1% 13% 43% 34% 8% -
49 BUCKLEY-JONES Henry C. 7% 32% 41% 17% 2% -
50 MILLER Aidan A. 3% 23% 51% 20% 3% -
51 POPESCU Tudor 10% 33% 37% 17% 3% -
52 WOODTHORPE Michael G. 18% 43% 31% 7% 1% -
53 BOUSSY Luciano 4% 23% 44% 26% 4% - -
54 ZHEN Ethan - 5% 40% 39% 14% 2% -
55 SIEGEL Elliot - 2% 14% 36% 37% 11%
56 CHAN Matthew 4% 20% 37% 30% 9% 1%
57 FOGELSON Frederick J. - - 7% 34% 43% 16%
58 BOOTHMAN Colby 23% 43% 27% 6% - -
59 TAHOUN Mostafa - 7% 38% 45% 10% -
60 BOUTIN Nathaniel J. 9% 42% 38% 10% 1% -
61 LI Arvin 1% 16% 48% 31% 4% -
62 LU Yikai - - 6% 28% 41% 22% 3%
63 SHAO Eric 4% 31% 46% 17% 2% -
64 ASCIONED'ELIA Adam I. 2% 35% 41% 18% 3% -
65 SANTULLI Tristan - 5% 31% 44% 17% 2%
66 AMRANI David 9% 52% 32% 6% - -
67 LI Ayren 24% 52% 21% 2% - -
68 WILBERT Matt 4% 23% 40% 27% 5% -
69 XU Ethan 14% 38% 35% 12% 1% -
70 BORGAL Cameron 5% 40% 40% 13% 2% -
71 LIGH Thomas 19% 42% 30% 9% 1% -
72 DESOLA Aidan J. - - 3% 22% 52% 20% 2%
73 VO Jonathan 47% 49% 4% - - - -
74 SEMAPAKDI-CHANG Kaiden 3% 31% 49% 15% 2% -
75 ALIMI Yacine A. 5% 25% 40% 25% 6% -
76 BARTRAM Carter H. 8% 28% 37% 21% 5% 1%
77 CURTIS William K. 6% 27% 40% 23% 4% -
78 ZHENG Harrison 31% 53% 15% 1% - -
79 CUTLER Andrew 20% 44% 29% 7% 1% -
80 CARPENTER Liam 15% 36% 33% 14% 2% -
81 GNEUHS Sam 40% 46% 12% 1% - -
82 WILSON Samuel S. 40% 50% 9% - - -
83 BANSAL Rahul 77% 22% 2% - - -
84 GARDINER Luke J. 21% 46% 27% 5% - - -
85 THADHANI Elio 51% 41% 7% - - -
86 DREW Nicolas 10% 59% 27% 4% - -
86 WU Michael 28% 45% 22% 4% - -
88 WOHLERS Casey 28% 49% 20% 3% - -
89 MONTALBINE Aidan 28% 44% 23% 5% - -
89 DOHONEY Tommy 73% 24% 2% - - -
89 XIAO Bowen 24% 45% 26% 5% - -
92 RIPA Joseph K. 88% 11% - - - -
93 ABRUZZESE Owen 77% 22% 2% - - -
93 ZHUANG Chuanxuan 43% 49% 8% - - -
95 BAO Chris W. 1% 11% 38% 40% 10% 1% -
95 EBERMAN Henry 45% 51% 4% - - - -
97 WOHLERS Trevor 47% 44% 8% 1% - -
97 BISHOP Henry 64% 32% 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.