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 | WILSON Jude | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 74% | 13% | |
2 | MICLAUS Justin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 51% |
3 | TE VELDE Noah C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 34% |
3 | AYMAN Mostafa | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 92% | |
5 | OH Triton | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 43% |
6 | STAMIS Kyle | 100% | 100% | 96% | 82% | 52% | 19% | 3% |
7 | GONG Jerry | 100% | 99% | 87% | 49% | 14% | 2% | |
8 | MICHELL Bailey | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 37% |
9 | BABAYEV Gabriel A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 59% |
10 | CHEONG Heonjun | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 25% |
10 | AL-NASSER Mahmoud | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 62% |
12 | BARNETT Adam | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 65% |
13 | FORMENTI Giulio | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 39% | 6% |
14 | TENG MATTHEW | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 65% | 22% | |
15 | GINSBERG Jordan | 100% | 100% | 93% | 59% | 11% | - | |
16 | ZEWDA Kebron | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 21% | 2% |
17 | DEPEW Spencer | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 56% | 15% |
18 | ZHAO Lucas | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 42% | 10% | |
19 | CORTEZ Christopher | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 55% | 15% |
20 | KWALWASSER Eric | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 32% |
21 | FREDRICK Jameer | 100% | 96% | 78% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - |
22 | NG Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 94% | 70% | 32% | 6% | |
23 | SUGIURA Samuel | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 28% | 4% |
24 | LAUB William | 100% | 100% | 94% | 72% | 37% | 11% | 1% |
25 | WANG ANDREW CHANG | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 30% | 6% |
26 | PIWOWAR Alex | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 32% | 5% |
27 | LIN Steve | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 58% | 21% | 3% |
28 | VARUKATTY-GAFOOR Sohil | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 31% | 6% |
29 | MATTOO Deven | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 27% | 5% | |
30 | TOZZI Massimo | 100% | 99% | 87% | 55% | 19% | 3% | - |
31 | BYON Julian | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 65% | 24% | |
32 | TSAO Oliver | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 26% | 6% | - |
33 | FIELDS Matthew S. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 40% | 10% |
34 | MATTOO Surya | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 7% |
35 | HU Christopher | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 53% | 3% | |
36 | WANG Jerry | 100% | 95% | 72% | 34% | 8% | 1% | |
37 | WANG Will | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 28% | 4% |
38 | JONES Graham H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 29% | 5% |
39 | DUMOULIN Gabriel | 100% | 99% | 88% | 62% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
40 | CLARK Gabriel | 100% | 93% | 66% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - |
41 | CHAKRAVORTY Sohan | 100% | 88% | 53% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
42 | LIU Kevin | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 34% | 6% | |
43 | GLOZMAN Justin | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 51% | 15% | |
44 | BROU Inkosi | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 27% | 5% | |
45 | DEANS Donovan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 77% | |
46 | MCCARTHY Gabriel | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 21% | |
47 | KIM Theodore | 100% | 99% | 87% | 50% | 12% | - | - |
48 | YUAN Kevin | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 15% | 2% |
49 | HUANG Alexander C. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 42% | 11% | 1% |
50 | MCCARTHY Devan | 100% | 100% | 94% | 64% | 17% | - | |
51 | DESAUTELS Connor | 100% | 94% | 60% | 17% | 2% | - | |
52 | ZHOU Grant | 100% | 96% | 72% | 34% | 8% | 1% | - |
53 | HO Jacob | 100% | 99% | 86% | 52% | 18% | 3% | - |
54 | BRIDGEMAN Andrew T. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 37% | 11% | 1% |
55 | COOKSON Leonardo | 100% | 100% | 94% | 68% | 24% | 1% | - |
56 | MCDONALD Finn | 100% | 97% | 80% | 44% | 13% | 2% | - |
57 | BOULAIS Andrew D. | 100% | 99% | 88% | 59% | 25% | 6% | 1% |
58 | WANG Max | 100% | 96% | 73% | 36% | 9% | 1% | |
59 | LIU Jerry | 100% | 92% | 49% | 10% | 1% | - | |
60 | WANG Daniel | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 37% | 8% | |
61 | BYON Adrian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 79% | 45% | 12% |
62 | CHENG Hong | 100% | 99% | 82% | 46% | 15% | 2% | - |
63 | SUBA Lucas | 100% | 96% | 71% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - |
64 | BODKIN Jake M. | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 20% | 4% | - |
65 | CLARK Aram | 100% | 97% | 72% | 33% | 8% | 1% | |
66 | RYAN Kai | 100% | 100% | 93% | 64% | 21% | 1% | - |
67 | BADUSHOV Anton | 100% | 97% | 79% | 44% | 13% | 2% | - |
68 | MANESCU Miron | 100% | 96% | 67% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - |
69 | GONG zihao | 100% | 96% | 66% | 20% | 1% | - | |
70 | VEDRE Neil | 100% | 91% | 60% | 23% | 5% | - | - |
71 | WANG Michael | 100% | 93% | 63% | 25% | 5% | - | - |
72 | CHENG Brandon | 100% | 96% | 69% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - |
73 | CUSUMANO Neal | 100% | 94% | 70% | 35% | 11% | 2% | - |
74 | VILEMAITIS Tadas | 100% | 83% | 35% | 7% | - | - | - |
75 | BLACKBURN Henry | 100% | 46% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
76 | SUN Andrew | 100% | 86% | 53% | 20% | 5% | - | - |
77 | HUANG Maxwell H. | 100% | 91% | 53% | 13% | 1% | - | |
78 | SCHIMEL Luke | 100% | 34% | 5% | - | - | - | |
79 | MARGULIS Jared | 100% | 80% | 32% | 6% | - | - | |
80 | BARROWS Hunter | 100% | 47% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
81 | SHELMIDINE Cole | 100% | 37% | 5% | - | - | - | |
82 | KO Zuriel | 100% | 99% | 88% | 56% | 20% | 3% | - |
83 | AO Christopher | 100% | 84% | 48% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
84 | O'LOUGHLIN Quinlan | 100% | 90% | 49% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
85 | RINDISBACHER Peter | 100% | 37% | 6% | 1% | - | - | - |
85 | TEVEBAUGH Andrew | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 34% | 9% | 1% |
87 | GUEVARA Alexander | 100% | 39% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
88 | TSAO Alister | 100% | 53% | 11% | 1% | - | - | |
89 | IVRON Yonatan | 100% | 62% | 20% | 3% | - | - | |
90 | KMETA-SUAREZ Graysen | 100% | 65% | 23% | 4% | - | - | - |
91 | AMES Kylan | 100% | 72% | 30% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
91 | BANSAL Krishiv | 100% | 66% | 24% | 4% | - | - | - |
93 | GAYEVSKY Maximilian | 100% | 54% | 13% | 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.