Motor City SYC/RCC

Y-12 Men's Foil

Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 8:00 AM

UWM Sports Complex - Pontiac, MI, USA

Probability density of pool victories

Reset

Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool 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 SENIC Lucas 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 66%
2 GHEDINI Luca 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 93% 61%
3 PALMA Nathan Anthony 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 94% 61%
3 PARRISH Evan 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 93% 60%
5 TANG Alexander L. 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 57%
6 SUAREZ David 100% 100% 100% 96% 80% 43% 7%
7 FEDELI Francesco 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 68% 19%
8 LI Richard 100% 100% 99% 94% 74% 37% 7%
9 ZHANG Lucas 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 74% 30%
10 GUTH Joseph 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 89% 53%
11 DHOKTE Neev 100% 100% 100% 95% 65% 18%
12 LU Jingyi 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 89% 47%
13 DESERANNO Leander 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 85% 45%
14 ZHENG Marcus 100% 100% 100% 97% 80% 42% 7%
15 RODRIGUEZ Tyler 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 65% 21%
16 TSAY Jordan R. 100% 100% 100% 99% 87% 45%
17 LU Alex 100% 100% 100% 98% 82% 34% 5%
18 PARKER Isaiah 100% 100% 100% 98% 85% 39%
19 CHOI Benjamin 100% 100% 97% 83% 49% 12%
20 BAI Austin 100% 100% 96% 75% 36% 8% -
21 OZAWA Taishi 100% 100% 99% 90% 63% 26% 4%
22 HICKEY Connor 100% 100% 100% 97% 76% 31% 4%
23 WU Thomas 100% 98% 85% 53% 19% 3% -
24 ELKOUSY Zain al Din 100% 100% 100% 96% 77% 34%
25 CHUANG Oscar 100% 100% 100% 97% 79% 29%
26 LI Lucas 100% 100% 96% 80% 46% 14% 1%
27 KNIBBE Nathan 100% 100% 100% 99% 90% 53% 10%
28 MARISI Gabriel 100% 100% 98% 86% 57% 21% 2%
29 JAZWINSKI Ryan 100% 100% 99% 89% 59% 21% 2%
30 GE Felix Fei 100% 100% 97% 80% 44% 12% 1%
31 LATORRE Leonardo 100% 100% 93% 69% 32% 8% 1%
32 FANG Haoyu 100% 98% 86% 56% 22% 4% -
33 TAN Charlie 100% 100% 98% 84% 49% 14% 1%
34 LIU Yinhong 100% 100% 95% 78% 45% 14% 1%
35 RAU Shogun 100% 100% 95% 75% 38% 9% 1%
36 GOGOI Kavi 100% 95% 71% 29% 5% -
37 PAN Ethan 100% 100% 94% 69% 25% 4% -
38 WANG Xiuqi(Arthur) 100% 98% 82% 46% 14% 2% -
39 ZMUDA Aiden 100% 95% 72% 36% 10% 1% -
40 KUANG Cyrus 100% 100% 92% 67% 31% 7% -
41 WEI JR Shan 100% 100% 98% 82% 46% 13% 1%
42 HUYNH Matthew 100% 100% 96% 74% 35% 8% -
43 WU Wallace 100% 100% 95% 78% 44% 13% 1%
44 JIN Xuechong Daniel 100% 98% 84% 46% 10% 1%
45 WENGER Rowan 100% 100% 98% 82% 38% 6%
46 DEMPSEY Julian 100% 96% 73% 36% 9% 1%
47 CZARNECKI Thomas 100% 97% 80% 44% 13% 1%
48 PUTHOFF Henry 100% 90% 52% 12% 1% -
49 BILLIET Greyson 100% 81% 36% 6% - -
50 SLAIN Owen 100% 95% 63% 17% 1% - -
51 MCGRATH Milo 100% 98% 82% 48% 16% 2% -
52 WANG Daniel 100% 98% 82% 47% 16% 3% -
53 ALVAREZ Francisco Janusz 100% 93% 65% 29% 7% 1% -
54 LU Hansen 100% 97% 80% 47% 16% 3% -
55 SONG Yuxuan Austin 100% 94% 67% 29% 7% 1% -
56 DEBORD Beckett 100% 100% 93% 69% 33% 8% 1%
57 PAN Howard Haoran 100% 100% 97% 75% 26% 3% -
58 WEI Winston 100% 75% 31% 7% 1% - -
59 DIFRANK Avery 100% 99% 88% 55% 19% 3% -
60 WANG Caleb 100% 99% 92% 66% 29% 6% -
61 JI Dachai 100% 73% 32% 7% 1% - -
62 MAZAHERI John 100% 87% 36% 7% 1% - -
63 GREULICH Nikolas 100% 58% 17% 3% - - -
64 GUO Joey 100% 76% 36% 10% 1% - -
65 WENGER Liam 100% 97% 80% 46% 15% 2% -
66 KIM Joshua Yeohwi 100% 94% 63% 22% 3% - -
67 PAYNE Lynas 100% 71% 29% 6% 1% -
68 MAZAHERI Theodore 100% 83% 40% 9% 1% -
69 TATE Linus 100% 93% 66% 29% 6% -
70 GARRARD Jeremiah 100% 84% 35% 5% - - -
71 KOLACKI Gabriel 100% 91% 51% 16% 2% - -
72 DEWAR Gabe 100% 84% 41% 9% 1% - -
73 RITTER Nathan D. 100% 51% 10% 1% - - -
74 FRASER Rhys 100% 99% 91% 64% 28% 6% -
75 NG Gavin 100% 67% 21% 2% - -
76 EDWARDS Connor 100% 86% 50% 17% 3% - -
77 NOTHIAS Sebastien 100% 61% 16% 2% - - -
78 RODGERSON Jasper 100% 70% 26% 4% - -
79 CHAN William 100% 26% 3% - - - -
80 HALLETTMANES Ezra 100% 44% 8% 1% - - -
81 SHAH Aadi 100% 34% 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.