Madison, NJ - Madison, 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 | JONES Simon A. | - | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 38% | 20% |
2 | ZUCKER Noah L. | - | - | 1% | 5% | 21% | 42% | 32% |
3 | ANDREEV Arthur | - | 1% | 6% | 20% | 36% | 30% | 8% |
3 | KUMAR Anitya | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 6% |
5 | SHENG Patrick Y. | - | 2% | 9% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 7% |
6 | DOSS David A. | - | - | 3% | 13% | 32% | 36% | 16% |
7 | SLAVINSKIY Alan | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 33% |
8 | LAVENSTEIN Kinley V. | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
9 | YU Colin | - | - | - | 3% | 15% | 41% | 41% |
9 | KANG Michael H. | - | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 35% | 14% |
11 | HOLTZ Donovan K. | - | - | 2% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 21% |
12 | JACKSON Anthony I. | 2% | 17% | 34% | 30% | 13% | 3% | < 1% |
13 | BEDOR William J. | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 37% | 18% | 3% |
14 | KIM Juni C. | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 42% | 35% |
15 | CHA Russell W. | - | - | 4% | 16% | 35% | 34% | 11% |
16 | DE LA CRUZ Jean Carlos | - | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 41% | 20% |
17 | MCDERMOTT Brian | - | - | 5% | 21% | 37% | 29% | 8% |
18 | STUSNICK Hunter | - | 3% | 13% | 32% | 37% | 16% | |
19 | SAM Kory | - | 4% | 16% | 31% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
20 | INSLER Gabriel C. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 32% | 12% |
21 | KAMBESELES Jack M. | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 36% | 32% | 9% |
22 | TABLEMAN Doug S. | - | - | 4% | 15% | 32% | 34% | 14% |
23 | INSLER Ethan C. | - | 3% | 15% | 30% | 32% | 16% | 3% |
24 | MOYSE Alexander S. | - | 5% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
25 | PHO Eric | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
26 | ALFAIATE Lucas | 9% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
27 | LEE Timothy S. | - | 2% | 9% | 25% | 35% | 23% | 6% |
28 | ABDALLAH Ahmed | 10% | 29% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
29 | DIXON Samuel | 1% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
30 | ZHANG Matthew | 2% | 13% | 30% | 34% | 18% | 3% | |
31 | FELDMAN Jaemin | - | 4% | 17% | 33% | 31% | 13% | 2% |
32 | KRONROD Tal | - | 3% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
33 | YUROVCHAK Andrew T. | - | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 35% | 11% |
34 | BARREIRO Darren | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% |
35 | ZHENG Hagen | - | 1% | 6% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 8% |
36 | ZHANG YuJian | - | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 38% | 17% |
37 | COLLYMORE Spencer T. | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
38 | TIRRELL Justin J. | 2% | 11% | 27% | 33% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
38 | FERREIRA Jeremy | 1% | 6% | 23% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
40 | RHYU Kozmo | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 5% |
41 | LIBSON Tazman | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 8% | |
42 | CHAWLA Armaan | 2% | 13% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - |
43 | MARCHANT Albert J. | - | 7% | 23% | 34% | 25% | 9% | 1% |
44 | BEACH Nicholas | 1% | 6% | 20% | 32% | 27% | 12% | 2% |
45 | BREKHMAN Maxim | 2% | 14% | 31% | 31% | 17% | 4% | - |
46 | DIAS-LALCACA Kieran P. | 4% | 20% | 35% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
47 | SMITH Nicholas S. | 1% | 10% | 26% | 33% | 22% | 7% | 1% |
48 | DIDASKALOU Ilias L. | - | 2% | 8% | 23% | 34% | 25% | 7% |
48 | BHATNAGAR Nishay V. | - | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 36% | 14% |
48 | GERSEN Jacob | 25% | 41% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
51 | SPANO Gideon S. | 1% | 11% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
51 | INFINITO Christopher E. | - | 1% | 8% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 8% |
53 | SHORT Salim (Sal) A. | - | 5% | 18% | 32% | 29% | 13% | 2% |
54 | BORATIN Daniel I. | 5% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% | |
55 | SHAH Maximilian A. | 16% | 36% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | |
56 | STEVENS James F. | 2% | 11% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
57 | MUNROE Shane | 3% | 17% | 34% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - |
58 | LONCAR Luka E. | 5% | 20% | 33% | 27% | 12% | 3% | - |
59 | JIN Owen | 2% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
60 | LIU Jack | 4% | 21% | 36% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
61 | GRILLO Niccolo (Nicco) | 4% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 12% | 2% | - |
62 | BINDAS Odinn A. | 21% | 40% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
63 | PEDERSEN Christopher C. | 5% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
64 | LANGTON Sawyer | 5% | 22% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% | |
65 | STOREY Joseph P. | - | - | 5% | 22% | 38% | 28% | 7% |
66 | GOHEL Dayus T. | - | 5% | 21% | 34% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
67 | TUCKER Owen J. | 5% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
68 | SOOMRO Adam A. | 1% | 11% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 4% | - |
69 | MACKIN Samuel | 1% | 11% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 3% | - |
70 | ROKOSNY Kyle | 1% | 8% | 23% | 32% | 25% | 10% | 2% |
71 | HONG James | 17% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
72 | JIN Alexander | 1% | 10% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
73 | RYAN Joshua P. | 2% | 13% | 30% | 32% | 17% | 5% | - |
74 | MOTIR Lucas D. | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 5% |
75 | DYER Ian E. | 9% | 31% | 36% | 19% | 5% | - | - |
76 | MORSE Tyler | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 4% |
77 | WISNIEWSKI Bart | 18% | 37% | 30% | 12% | 3% | - | - |
78 | GREGORY Abram | - | 4% | 15% | 30% | 31% | 16% | 3% |
79 | ZARETSKY Daniel A. | 2% | 11% | 27% | 33% | 20% | 6% | 1% |
80 | PAK Charles | 2% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 5% | - |
81 | WU Joseph | 4% | 21% | 36% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
82 | O'BRIEN Timothy S. | 17% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
83 | BAKER Kevin G. | - | 4% | 16% | 31% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
84 | WILKINSON Derek H. | - | 3% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 2% |
85 | BHATNAGAR Ayan | 7% | 47% | 35% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
86 | FENWICK Luke A. | 3% | 19% | 36% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
86 | SKIFFINGTON Sam | 24% | 40% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
88 | DE CLERMONT Geo | 62% | 32% | 6% | 1% | - | - | - |
89 | LI Jeffrey | 11% | 31% | 33% | 18% | 5% | 1% | - |
90 | SIDDIQUI Humza K. | 7% | 25% | 34% | 23% | 8% | 2% | - |
91 | LI Brian | 16% | 37% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
92 | WANG Eric S | 10% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 5% | 1% | - |
93 | PARK Frederick | 29% | 41% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
94 | CHEN Austin | 40% | 41% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - |
95 | KUMAR Aidan | 29% | 42% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
96 | GORTI Agustya | 39% | 41% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
97 | KHAN Raaid | 75% | 23% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
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.