Rockland Community College (Eugene Levy Fieldhouse) - None
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 | RADOSLAVOV Ivan-Asen | - | - | - | 4% | 23% | 45% | 28% |
| 2 | SHAPIRO Leon | - | - | 1% | 8% | 32% | 42% | 17% |
| 3 | LI Aaron | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 33% |
| 3 | TAN Aidan | - | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 41% | 29% |
| 5 | SHAO Eric | - | - | 2% | 14% | 38% | 36% | 10% |
| 6 | CHENG Ethan | - | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 44% | 21% |
| 7 | LIU Derek | - | - | 1% | 5% | 22% | 42% | 30% |
| 8 | CHEN Hanson | - | - | - | 6% | 34% | 45% | 15% |
| 9 | TANG August L. | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 44% | 40% |
| 10 | GULCHIN Mark (Yerma) | - | - | - | 9% | 40% | 40% | 10% |
| 11 | ZHEN Ethan | - | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 42% | 26% |
| 12 | LEE Brendan | - | - | - | 1% | 14% | 44% | 41% |
| 13 | CHEN Kyle P. | - | - | 2% | 10% | 31% | 41% | 16% |
| 14 | CHEN Ethan | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 6% |
| 15 | GHEDINI Luca | - | - | - | 5% | 25% | 48% | 21% |
| 16 | BOURGUIGNAT James | 7% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 17 | SIMONOV Timofey | - | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 34% | 11% |
| 18 | SENANI Arjun | 1% | 8% | 33% | 40% | 15% | 2% | < 1% |
| 19 | TANG Terry | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 4% |
| 20 | XU Andy P. | - | - | - | 4% | 21% | 45% | 30% |
| 21 | YANG Dylan | - | 5% | 21% | 36% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
| 22 | VISHAWADIA Jaimin | - | 3% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 12% | 2% |
| 23 | ARCE Andrew W. | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 39% | 21% | 4% |
| 23 | GE Daniel | - | 1% | 8% | 31% | 42% | 17% | 2% |
| 25 | MARTIN Mason | 2% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 26 | YAO Bradley | - | - | 1% | 5% | 22% | 43% | 30% |
| 27 | SHANNON Jack | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 28 | GERRISH William | - | 3% | 14% | 33% | 34% | 14% | 2% |
| 29 | HOLLIS Sean | 6% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 9% | 2% | - |
| 30 | BLEIL Tyler | 2% | 12% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
| 31 | LEE Eugene | - | 1% | 7% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 7% |
| 32 | JURMAN Therin | 1% | 7% | 26% | 37% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
| 33 | ZHUANG Chuanxuan | - | 4% | 21% | 42% | 27% | 6% | - |
| 34 | FENG Michael | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 38% | 27% | 6% |
| 35 | MATTOS Luis Felipe | 2% | 14% | 35% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 36 | XIE Jicheng | 1% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 37 | HOU Gaven | - | 1% | 14% | 53% | 26% | 4% | - |
| 38 | BAKSHI Aman | 1% | 10% | 36% | 38% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 39 | TJON Calum | - | 4% | 20% | 36% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
| 39 | CHA James | 45% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 41 | LI Ayren | - | 1% | 10% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 4% |
| 42 | MAGAZU Christopher | 13% | 45% | 36% | 6% | - | - | - |
| 43 | CHENG Austyn | 5% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 44 | PERLMAN Taiyo | 2% | 31% | 44% | 20% | 3% | - | - |
| 45 | CHANDRAMOHAN Aran | 5% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 46 | STAFFORD Gareth | 23% | 42% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 47 | DIAZ Gabriel | 2% | 27% | 45% | 22% | 4% | - | - |
| 48 | MO Ethan | 3% | 15% | 31% | 31% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 49 | BARBANEL Joseph | 25% | 42% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 50 | WANG Ancen | 13% | 46% | 31% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 51 | POLEBOYINA Amrit | 12% | 35% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 52 | NICOLL William | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 37% | 27% | 6% |
| 53 | SABATINO Patrick | 11% | 43% | 40% | 6% | - | - | - |
| 54 | TAM Kyle | 2% | 13% | 33% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 55 | RIPA Joseph K. | 13% | 33% | 33% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
| 56 | DI TELLA Ulises | 10% | 36% | 36% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 57 | CHUN Zachary | 39% | 46% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 58 | ZHANG Julian | 57% | 35% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 59 | QIAN Zekai | 10% | 33% | 36% | 17% | 4% | - | - |
| 60 | MENDEZ Ren | 28% | 49% | 20% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 61 | EZPELETA Gaelan | 83% | 16% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 62 | PERKINS Nathaniel | 49% | 41% | 9% | - | - | - | - |
| 63 | GOODMAN Elliott | 44% | 41% | 13% | 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.