Sportsplex at Metuchen - Metuchen, NJ, USA
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 | MICLAUS Justin | - | - | 1% | 14% | 46% | 38% | |
| 2 | DENG Andrew | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 44% | 41% |
| 3 | MCCARTHY Gabriel | - | - | 2% | 11% | 32% | 38% | 16% |
| 3 | ZENG Noah | - | - | 4% | 22% | 44% | 29% | |
| 5 | MAKLIN Edward P. | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 44% | 40% |
| 6 | SHOMAN Zachary | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 41% | 43% |
| 7 | NOBLE Colin | - | - | 5% | 23% | 44% | 27% | |
| 8 | CHEN Evan P. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 37% | 34% | 9% |
| 9 | KUSHKOV Daniel | - | 2% | 16% | 39% | 34% | 9% | |
| 10 | SUGIURA Samuel | - | 5% | 22% | 39% | 27% | 7% | 1% |
| 11 | LUTHRA Arjun | - | - | - | 5% | 24% | 48% | 23% |
| 12 | SHOMAN Noah | - | - | 3% | 19% | 49% | 29% | |
| 13 | ROBERTS Justin C. | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 42% | 16% | |
| 14 | CADAMBI Roshan | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 42% | 22% | |
| 15 | KIM Matthew | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 32% | 9% | |
| 16 | YEN Preston | - | - | 4% | 19% | 42% | 35% | |
| 17 | KIM-COGAN Ryan | - | - | 2% | 13% | 42% | 44% | |
| 18 | BRANDT Jaden | - | 6% | 28% | 45% | 18% | 2% | |
| 19 | SAVOY Luca | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 42% | 23% | 4% |
| 20 | DOLAN Charles R. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 42% | 21% |
| 21 | HU Christopher | - | - | 1% | 7% | 30% | 44% | 17% |
| 22 | EPSTEIN Oliver D. | 1% | 15% | 37% | 34% | 12% | 1% | |
| 23 | LEONARD Charles | 10% | 31% | 36% | 19% | 5% | - | |
| 24 | GLOZMAN Justin | - | 2% | 10% | 32% | 42% | 15% | |
| 25 | SHI Erick | 2% | 14% | 34% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 26 | GOLD Carter | 1% | 14% | 37% | 34% | 12% | 1% | |
| 27 | KATZ Ryan | 3% | 26% | 41% | 24% | 6% | - | |
| 28 | LIU Mingyang Ryan | - | 1% | 11% | 32% | 40% | 17% | |
| 29 | FRANCOIS Alexander C. | 2% | 13% | 35% | 34% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 30 | SMINK Oliver | 7% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 7% | 1% | |
| 31 | GOLDMAN Robert | 3% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 32 | BHATIA Ekam | 16% | 39% | 32% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 33 | RYAN Kai | 2% | 13% | 30% | 33% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 34 | SAHAY Kenji | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 32% | 12% | 1% |
| 35 | PANDEY Neil | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 43% | 21% | |
| 36 | STAMIS Kyle | 6% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 7% | 1% | |
| 37 | ZHAO Lucas | 2% | 23% | 41% | 27% | 7% | 1% | |
| 38 | TASIKAS Stylianos | - | 10% | 32% | 37% | 18% | 3% | |
| 38 | MCCARTHY Devan | 1% | 13% | 35% | 35% | 14% | 2% | |
| 40 | BELLA JARO Marcus Vincent | 19% | 40% | 30% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 41 | BURR Gavin | 12% | 38% | 36% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 42 | LIN Philip T. | 3% | 19% | 39% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 43 | KIM Andrew | 7% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 6% | - | |
| 44 | CHUNG Connor | 8% | 29% | 38% | 21% | 4% | - | |
| 45 | MATTOO Surya | 13% | 43% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 46 | NGUYEN Anthony | 8% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 6% | 1% | |
| 47 | LASKOW Oliver | 19% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 48 | ZHAO Andy | 6% | 22% | 34% | 26% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 49 | ONG Chinli | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 50 | ZHU Shao | - | 5% | 20% | 37% | 28% | 9% | 1% |
| 51 | HO Jacob | 12% | 38% | 34% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 52 | BRANDOFINO James M. | 1% | 10% | 27% | 36% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 53 | WONG Caleb W. | 41% | 43% | 15% | 2% | - | - | |
| 54 | GILPIN Samuel | 6% | 30% | 41% | 19% | 3% | - | |
| 55 | WITCZAK Mateus | 13% | 40% | 35% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 55 | MOULTON Ian | 6% | 30% | 43% | 18% | 2% | - | |
| 57 | DIMATTEO Michael | 2% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 58 | XU Justin | 45% | 42% | 12% | 1% | - | - | |
| 59 | MANESCU Miron | 38% | 43% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 60 | ZHOU Grant | 6% | 25% | 39% | 24% | 5% | - | |
| 61 | BUCK Maximilian | 80% | 19% | 2% | - | - | - | |
| 62 | ARORA Pranav | 67% | 28% | 4% | - | - | - | |
| 63 | KOMETANI TYLER | 7% | 30% | 42% | 19% | 2% | - | - |
| 64 | DELISSER Matthew | 19% | 40% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
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.