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.

Neil Lazar RYC/RJCC

Junior Men's Saber

Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 4:00 PM

Floyd Little Athletic Center - New Haven, CT, 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 SHOMAN Zachary - - 1% 7% 28% 44% 19%
2 DENG Andrew - - 3% 19% 45% 33%
3 BABAYEV Gabriel A. - - 1% 7% 34% 58%
3 KIM Shaun M. - - - 1% 13% 42% 44%
5 MARGULIES William - - - 4% 18% 42% 36%
6 SLASTIN Andrew - 1% 8% 30% 43% 18%
7 KIM-COGAN Ryan - 1% 4% 17% 33% 33% 13%
8 MAKLIN Edward P. - - 1% 8% 27% 41% 22%
9 TONG ZACHARY - - - 2% 16% 45% 37%
10 MICLAUS Justin - - 4% 20% 44% 32%
11 KWALWASSER Eric - 1% 9% 30% 42% 18%
12 FIELDS Matthew S. - 4% 21% 40% 29% 5%
13 WAXLER Seth B. - - 2% 11% 31% 40% 16%
14 SKINNER Graham B. - - 1% 7% 28% 45% 20%
15 SHTEYN Mark - 4% 16% 31% 31% 15% 3%
16 KASPER Aaron 1% 6% 23% 37% 27% 7%
17 BAE Jason I. - - - 3% 20% 46% 32%
18 SHOMAN Noah - 1% 6% 25% 43% 26%
19 SHAHZAD Azlan A. - 1% 6% 25% 42% 23% 3%
20 ZHENG Edward L. - - 1% 6% 23% 43% 27%
21 HAN Daniel Y. - 3% 12% 28% 33% 19% 4%
22 LO Alexander - 2% 11% 31% 39% 18%
23 PANDEY Neil - - 1% 7% 33% 43% 16%
24 KOGAN Benjamin - - - 3% 18% 45% 34%
25 ZENG Noah - - 3% 15% 34% 35% 13%
26 WEBER Mattias A. - 1% 7% 23% 37% 26% 6%
27 CHTERENTAL Alex - 1% 7% 26% 41% 22% 4%
28 MYLEK Peter - 5% 17% 31% 30% 14% 3%
29 TASIKAS Stylianos 1% 8% 28% 39% 20% 4% -
30 DOWNEY Baran 3% 16% 34% 32% 14% 2%
31 EYBELMAN Ariel 1% 12% 35% 36% 14% 1%
32 KUSHKOV Daniel - 7% 27% 39% 22% 4%
33 GINSBERG Jordan - 5% 19% 35% 29% 10% 1%
34 TENG Matthew - - 1% 11% 38% 39% 12%
35 HUANG Connor - 1% 8% 26% 37% 23% 5%
36 PIWOWAR Alex - 3% 18% 38% 32% 9%
37 PENG Bryan 1% 6% 23% 36% 27% 7%
38 KESSLER Josh 1% 7% 25% 37% 24% 7% 1%
39 KESSLER Nathan 1% 13% 36% 36% 12% 2% -
39 BROOK Joel 3% 19% 41% 29% 7% 1% -
39 CHUNG Connor 1% 14% 38% 34% 10% 1% -
42 GONG Jerry - 6% 26% 39% 23% 5%
43 FRANCOIS Alexander C. 13% 35% 33% 15% 3% -
43 TSAO Oliver 17% 40% 30% 10% 2% -
45 DEPEW Spencer 1% 6% 23% 37% 26% 7%
46 KUSHKOV Veniamin - 3% 16% 34% 34% 13%
47 BONDARENCO Vlad 2% 18% 40% 30% 8% 1%
48 SUGIURA Samuel 1% 9% 28% 36% 21% 4%
49 HUROWITZ Max 2% 16% 37% 32% 11% 1%
50 SHIRPAL Oleksandr - - 1% 8% 31% 45% 16%
51 LEE Andrew 13% 40% 34% 12% 2% -
52 LIU Mingyang Ryan - 5% 19% 35% 31% 10%
53 DOLAN Charles R. - 1% 6% 25% 42% 23% 4%
54 DIMATTEO Michael 7% 28% 37% 22% 6% 1% -
55 MATTOO Surya 6% 27% 38% 23% 6% 1% -
55 HOPPA Luke H. - 3% 14% 31% 33% 16% 3%
57 KATZ Ryan 3% 21% 41% 28% 7% 1% -
58 HUANG Alexander C. - 5% 25% 42% 23% 4%
58 BROU Inkosi 1% 10% 32% 38% 16% 2%
60 KEIPER Benjamin 42% 42% 14% 2% - -
61 SMINK Oliver - 6% 26% 41% 22% 4% -
62 LIU Kevin - 3% 13% 32% 35% 16% 2%
63 ELIN Adam E. 2% 13% 29% 32% 18% 5% 1%
64 MUNGOVAN Matthew 15% 39% 32% 12% 2% - -
65 SMITH Vaughn 1% 9% 27% 36% 21% 5% -
66 WANG daniel 5% 21% 34% 27% 11% 2% -
67 PEACE Joshua 29% 43% 22% 5% 1% - -
68 WITCZAK Mateus 1% 12% 47% 33% 7% 1% -
69 XU Justin 49% 39% 11% 1% - -
70 LIN Philip T. 17% 46% 30% 7% 1% -
71 NGUYEN Anthony 2% 15% 34% 32% 14% 3% -
72 SEN Christian 22% 46% 26% 6% - - -
73 CUSUMANO Neal 27% 42% 23% 6% 1% - -
74 LAUB William 5% 25% 37% 24% 8% 1% -
75 JIN David 22% 60% 17% 1% - - -
76 MOULTON Ian 9% 36% 38% 16% 2% -
77 PERRON Robert 1% 12% 34% 36% 15% 1%
78 FREDRICK Jameer 14% 43% 32% 10% 1% -
79 BADUSHOV Anton 10% 37% 37% 14% 2% - -
80 BRANDOFINO James M. 8% 34% 38% 17% 3% - -
81 DEKA Tanush - 2% 23% 48% 23% 4% -
82 MAO Jeremy 4% 21% 36% 28% 10% 2% -
83 RYAN Kai 20% 40% 29% 10% 2% -
84 YOSHEA Henry 44% 42% 13% 1% - -
85 RAGAN STEINSSON Sigurdur 37% 42% 18% 3% - - -
86 HO Jacob 25% 42% 25% 7% 1% -
87 SHELMIDINE Cole 36% 45% 16% 2% - - -
88 DESAUTELS Connor 50% 39% 9% 1% - -
89 BOULAIS Andrew D. 24% 40% 26% 9% 2% - -
90 KMETA-SUAREZ Graysen 63% 33% 3% - - - -
91 TSAO Alister 58% 35% 7% 1% - - -
92 DOWNEND Aaron 48% 40% 11% 1% - - -

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.