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 | BEZRODNOV Michael | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 41% | 44% |
| 2 | MAO Benjamin | - | - | 6% | 29% | 47% | 18% | |
| 3 | RICHARD Owen | - | - | 2% | 11% | 33% | 39% | 15% |
| 3 | ARAVIND Athreya | - | - | 3% | 18% | 40% | 31% | 7% |
| 5 | BEZRODNOV Alexander | - | - | - | - | 2% | 22% | 76% |
| 6 | MANN JAKEROD | - | - | 4% | 18% | 38% | 31% | 9% |
| 7 | WU Jonathan | - | - | - | 3% | 19% | 44% | 34% |
| 8 | KOKENGE Reid | - | - | 4% | 21% | 38% | 29% | 7% |
| 9 | KUMAR Aidan | - | - | - | 3% | 20% | 53% | 25% |
| 10 | SVERDLOV Seth | - | - | 1% | 11% | 35% | 40% | 13% |
| 11 | LEE Noah | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 41% | 50% |
| 12 | PARK Frederick | - | - | - | 5% | 26% | 51% | 17% |
| 13 | KNOX James | - | - | 1% | 13% | 43% | 43% | |
| 14 | AGAON Shawn | - | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 43% | 26% |
| 15 | THAKUR Om S. | - | - | 5% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 7% |
| 16 | LONGSTREET Jeffrey | - | - | 4% | 15% | 33% | 34% | 13% |
| 17 | KIM Juni C. | - | - | - | - | 6% | 37% | 57% |
| 18 | FLECKENSTEIN Benjamin T. | - | - | 4% | 19% | 39% | 30% | 7% |
| 19 | ZOU Xianyang (Max) | - | 5% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 11% | 2% |
| 20 | ZHONG Lee | 15% | 36% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 21 | BORATGIS Christopher J. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 24% |
| 22 | AGAON Ethan | - | - | 3% | 14% | 33% | 35% | 14% |
| 23 | ZHANG ethan | - | 2% | 14% | 36% | 36% | 10% | 1% |
| 24 | CHEN Leonardo | 3% | 21% | 43% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 25 | LAI Boden | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 36% | 17% | 1% |
| 26 | ROLLO Emmett H. | - | 4% | 17% | 33% | 32% | 13% | 1% |
| 27 | ZHAO Jonathan | - | - | 5% | 22% | 39% | 27% | 6% |
| 28 | HU Robert J. | - | 3% | 25% | 45% | 24% | 4% | |
| 29 | CHEN Jun Ho | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% |
| 30 | LAI Aedin | - | 1% | 10% | 32% | 37% | 18% | 3% |
| 31 | DOUBOV Andrew | 15% | 37% | 32% | 13% | 3% | - | - |
| 32 | HIGGINS Jett | 10% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 33 | KRISHNAN Skanda | 3% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 34 | WONG King-Yee | - | 4% | 19% | 40% | 30% | 6% | - |
| 35 | LEIBOWITZ Ryan | 1% | 11% | 42% | 35% | 10% | 1% | |
| 36 | MEN Junda | 2% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 37 | STELTENKAMP Neal | 1% | 11% | 33% | 37% | 16% | 2% | - |
| 38 | REPIC Oliver | 4% | 25% | 42% | 24% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 39 | DORASZELSKI Mark | - | 4% | 20% | 39% | 28% | 8% | 1% |
| 40 | GARCIA-CABRERA Jeffrey | 9% | 34% | 38% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 41 | ORESKOVIC Olivier | 23% | 44% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 41 | ZHANG Roland | 3% | 25% | 41% | 24% | 6% | - | - |
| 43 | WU Colin | - | 5% | 22% | 40% | 28% | 5% | - |
| 43 | KARIMOV Amir | 29% | 45% | 22% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 45 | OKUN Benjamin | 23% | 42% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 46 | LAPP Oliver | - | 4% | 22% | 41% | 26% | 6% | 1% |
| 47 | ZANELLI Ben | 9% | 36% | 37% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 48 | TESFAYE Elias | 39% | 48% | 12% | 1% | - | - | |
| 49 | SIYANKO Joshua | 1% | 10% | 28% | 36% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 50 | CHOU Benson | 2% | 21% | 41% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 51 | LEE Wyatt | 6% | 27% | 40% | 22% | 5% | - | - |
| 52 | HERTZOG Ben | 20% | 43% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 53 | ZOGRAFOS Nicholas | 44% | 43% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 53 | YU Samuel | 19% | 40% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 55 | TATE William Isom | 11% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 56 | WONG Maximus | 18% | 45% | 29% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 57 | ZENG Andrew | 7% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 58 | HO Ivan | 36% | 49% | 13% | 1% | - | - | |
| 59 | HU Nigel | 64% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 60 | WHEELER Jackson | 4% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 61 | SUBRAMANIAM Sahil | 51% | 39% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 62 | SHETTY Mihir | 15% | 41% | 34% | 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.