Rockland Community College, Eugene Levy Field House - Suffern, NY, 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 | CHEN Kyle P. | - | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 36% | 16% |
| 2 | STRAYER Andrew | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 36% | 52% |
| 3 | O'BRIEN Jack K. | - | - | - | - | 3% | 25% | 72% |
| 3 | LEE Jason N. | - | 1% | 9% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 6% |
| 5 | LU Howen | - | 1% | 5% | 17% | 33% | 33% | 13% |
| 6 | ABDELGAWAD Abdelrahman | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 42% | 36% |
| 7 | YE Gordon | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 37% | 26% | 5% |
| 8 | LINDEMANN Marc | 2% | 13% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 3% | |
| 9 | VISHAWADIA Jaimin | - | 2% | 10% | 25% | 34% | 23% | 6% |
| 10 | FENG Michael | - | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 35% | 15% |
| 11 | YANG Dylan | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% | |
| 12 | MILLER Dillon | - | 3% | 14% | 30% | 33% | 17% | 3% |
| 13 | DALBERG Anders | - | 2% | 14% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 2% |
| 14 | BONOMO Sebastian J. | 2% | 12% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 15 | ARCE Andrew W. | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 12% | 1% |
| 16 | BENTLEY Nick | 1% | 8% | 25% | 35% | 23% | 7% | 1% |
| 17 | FINLEY Dylan | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 40% | 43% |
| 18 | CENCE Myles K. | 1% | 11% | 30% | 33% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
| 19 | WERWA Griffith | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 39% | 31% | 4% |
| 20 | BAI Brian | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 6% |
| 21 | NICOLL William | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 6% |
| 22 | BAKSHI Aman | 2% | 15% | 34% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 23 | CHO Xzander | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 5% |
| 24 | MONTALBINE Aidan | 1% | 5% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 11% | 2% |
| 24 | ZENG Rick | - | 5% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
| 26 | NICOLL James | 3% | 15% | 31% | 31% | 15% | 4% | - |
| 27 | JURMAN Therin | 1% | 8% | 24% | 35% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
| 28 | MCLAUGHLIN Ryan | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 35% | 14% | |
| 29 | SURESH Rohan | 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 8% | - |
| 30 | BELCHAMBER Mason | 16% | 36% | 32% | 13% | 3% | - | - |
| 31 | CHANDRAMOHAN Aran | 30% | 41% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 32 | SHANNON Jack | 3% | 18% | 35% | 29% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 33 | JIMENEZ Naveen | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 38% | 28% | 6% |
| 34 | LI Allen | 1% | 7% | 24% | 35% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
| 35 | DONG Richard | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 35% | 57% |
| 36 | TJON Calum | - | 2% | 13% | 30% | 33% | 18% | 4% |
| 37 | TANG Alex | 7% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 38 | MASTROPAOLO Jonah W. | 1% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 6% | |
| 38 | GAO Andrew | 27% | 41% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 40 | HARRA Alexander | 3% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 41 | MUNDAHL Brandon | 1% | 6% | 20% | 32% | 27% | 12% | 2% |
| 42 | TAM Kyle | 1% | 10% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 43 | TANG xianchi | 1% | 12% | 32% | 34% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 44 | CHA James | 44% | 40% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 45 | WUN Jonathan | 5% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 9% | 1% | |
| 46 | GREENLEAF Paul | 3% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 47 | STAFFORD Gareth | 25% | 40% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 48 | SEIB-LEVINSON Conrad | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 49 | POWELL Sean | 2% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 49 | ABRAMKIN Tim | 22% | 38% | 28% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 51 | GONZALEZ II John L. | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 27% | 7% |
| 52 | LI Tristan | 4% | 20% | 35% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 53 | RIFFATERRE Jason | 6% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 54 | ONIK Ari N. | 1% | 14% | 33% | 33% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 55 | GORLOVITZKI Amitai | 3% | 15% | 30% | 31% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 56 | MURPHY Damian J. | 3% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 57 | PEDERSEN Charles | 2% | 17% | 34% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 58 | GODOVICH David | 10% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 59 | MAGAZU Christopher | 45% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 60 | JOO Michael | 1% | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 61 | JENKINS Michael | 61% | 32% | 6% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 62 | HAN Ethan | 65% | 29% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
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.