Rockland Community College, Eugene Levy Field House - Suffern, NY, USA
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 | ZHEXUAN yu | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 47% | 12% |
2 | HOPPA Luke H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 18% |
3 | ATWOOD Griffin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 39% | 9% |
3 | POWER Alex | 100% | 100% | 96% | 74% | 37% | 10% | 1% |
5 | VEDRE Neil | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 40% | 13% | 2% |
6 | COOKSON Leonardo | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 37% | 11% | 1% |
7 | PINTO Marcus | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 57% | 17% |
8 | WANG Jerry | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 57% | 23% | 4% |
9 | CHOKSI Vihaan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 39% | 8% |
10 | WITCZAK Mateus | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 37% | 8% |
10 | AO Christopher | 100% | 100% | 95% | 79% | 48% | 18% | 3% |
12 | RYAN Kai | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 39% | 10% |
13 | BODKIN Jake M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 35% | 6% |
14 | WANG William M. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 78% | 45% | 14% | 2% |
15 | ZHAO Lucas | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 56% | 18% |
16 | KMETA-SUAREZ Graysen | 100% | 93% | 67% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - |
17 | WANG Max | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 36% | 10% | 1% |
18 | DESAUTELS Connor | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 19% | 3% |
19 | BHATIA Ekam | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 77% | 44% | 12% |
20 | SADHU Neiyam | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
21 | STAMIS Kyle | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 59% | 18% |
22 | KIM Theodore | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 55% | 21% | 3% |
23 | VLASENKO Bohdan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 16% | 2% |
24 | TEVEBAUGH Andrew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 25% |
25 | SUBA Lucas | 100% | 100% | 97% | 86% | 57% | 24% | 4% |
26 | CARR Dylan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 62% | 20% |
27 | CHENG Brandon | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 26% | 4% |
28 | CUSUMANO Neal | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 26% | 6% | 1% |
29 | YUAN Kevin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 19% |
30 | LUAN Mark | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 21% | 4% | - |
31 | JONES Graham H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 64% |
32 | WONG Max | 100% | 96% | 78% | 44% | 16% | 3% | - |
33 | NGO Maximus | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 71% | 28% |
34 | TOZZI Massimo | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 38% | 11% | 1% |
35 | LEE Anderson | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 49% | 14% | 2% |
36 | SCHIMEL Luke | 100% | 68% | 27% | 6% | 1% | < 1% | - |
37 | WANG Michael | 100% | 99% | 94% | 77% | 46% | 16% | 3% |
38 | ZHOU Grant | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 32% | 6% | |
39 | SHAH Sajan | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 60% | 20% | |
40 | FREDRICK Jameer | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 53% | 19% | 3% |
41 | DIMATTEO Michael | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 65% | 31% | 7% |
42 | HUANG Maxwell H. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 64% | 25% | 4% | - |
43 | MARGULIS Jared | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 46% | 15% | 2% |
44 | WAXLER Aaron M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 22% |
45 | BERKOWITZ Gavin | 100% | 100% | 95% | 78% | 46% | 16% | 2% |
46 | CHAKRAVORTY Sohan | 100% | 98% | 83% | 49% | 16% | 2% | |
47 | WAXLER Ryan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 37% | 8% | |
48 | SUN Andrew | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 30% | 7% | 1% |
49 | SIMMONS John M. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 23% | 4% |
49 | MANESCU Miron | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 44% | 15% | 2% |
51 | CHENG Hong | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 19% | 2% |
52 | GONG zihao | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 24% |
53 | SHAH Sohan | 100% | 98% | 83% | 51% | 20% | 4% | - |
54 | HE Bowen | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 43% | 12% | 1% |
55 | SHELMIDINE Cole | 100% | 92% | 62% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
56 | TERENTIEV Max | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 43% | 12% |
57 | BANSAL Krishiv | 100% | 97% | 81% | 51% | 21% | 5% | - |
58 | BERGER Jacob | 100% | 96% | 75% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - |
59 | RAMIREZ Nicholas | 100% | 91% | 64% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - |
60 | UNG Kei | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 41% | 13% | 2% |
61 | PIENKOWSKI Jakub | 100% | 85% | 48% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
62 | LIGH Checed | 100% | 94% | 70% | 34% | 10% | 1% | - |
63 | WEISS Toby | 100% | 75% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
64 | BARROWS Hunter | 100% | 95% | 68% | 29% | 7% | 1% | - |
65 | SEN Christian | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 8% | 1% |
66 | MAMKIN Nathan | 100% | 46% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
67 | WEN Edward | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 47% | 13% |
68 | WEI William | 100% | 98% | 71% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - |
69 | FORD Tyler J. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 34% | 8% | 1% |
70 | ONG Dylan | 100% | 99% | 80% | 40% | 10% | 1% | - |
71 | GUEVARA Alexander | 100% | 58% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
72 | JANUS Maksymilian | 100% | 97% | 73% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - |
73 | VILEMAITIS Tadas | 100% | 97% | 81% | 51% | 21% | 5% | - |
74 | WOLMART Zander | 100% | 86% | 46% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
75 | ROSADO Sebastian | 100% | 58% | 18% | 3% | - | - | |
76 | ABDELGAWAD Abdelrahman | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 23% | 5% | - |
77 | BLACKBURN Henry | 100% | 66% | 21% | 3% | - | - | - |
78 | AMES Kylan | 100% | 94% | 70% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
78 | IVRON Yonatan | 100% | 96% | 78% | 47% | 18% | 4% | - |
80 | CUNLIFFE Sebastian | 100% | 55% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - |
80 | HAUSLER Jayden | 100% | 75% | 27% | 5% | - | - | - |
82 | PINTO Augusto | 100% | 84% | 48% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
83 | BADUSHOV Anton | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 31% | 7% | - |
83 | GAYEVSKY Maximilian | 100% | 95% | 73% | 40% | 14% | 3% | - |
85 | LIEUWMA Nicolas | 100% | 94% | 66% | 28% | 6% | 1% | |
86 | JACQUES Hugo | 100% | 76% | 35% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
87 | TABAK Eli | 100% | 55% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
88 | MA ziteng | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 18% | 3% | - |
89 | FLETCHER Logan | 100% | 93% | 69% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
90 | FENG Luke | 100% | 18% | 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.