The future of US Fencing is at stake!

For transparency, fairness, and athlete support, VOTE NOW for:
(1) Maria Panyi, (2) Andrey Geva, (3) Igor Chirashnya, and (4) Sue Moheb.

Morris Cup RYC/RJCC

Cadet Men's Saber

Saturday, April 6, 2024 at 10:45 AM

Rockland Community College, Eugene Levy Field House - Suffern, NY, USA

Probability density of pool victories

Reset

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 ZHAO Lucas - - 1% 7% 26% 42% 24%
2 LIN Philip T. - - 2% 11% 34% 40% 13%
3 SHIPITSIN Alexander - - - 4% 18% 42% 36%
3 AO Christopher - 4% 14% 29% 31% 17% 4%
5 LAUB William - 1% 13% 46% 35% 5%
6 HENDERSON Lucas - 2% 14% 34% 34% 14% 2%
7 MEHAN Nicholas - - - 2% 11% 38% 49%
8 LUAN Mark - - 5% 21% 39% 29% 6%
9 WANG Weiyun - 1% 8% 31% 42% 18%
10 SADHU Neiyam - 1% 5% 23% 40% 27% 5%
11 SUN Andrew 1% 6% 22% 36% 27% 9% 1%
12 LEE Griffin 1% 7% 28% 37% 22% 5% -
13 EYBELMAN Ariel - 5% 19% 36% 31% 10%
14 HE Bowen 1% 10% 31% 37% 18% 3%
15 PORTER Dupree 1% 10% 29% 35% 20% 5% -
16 NGUYEN Anthony - 1% 8% 35% 44% 13%
17 NGO Maximus - - - 2% 12% 40% 46%
18 NG Jonathan - - - 2% 12% 39% 47%
19 BRANDT Jaden - - - 5% 31% 63%
20 GONG zihao - - 2% 11% 32% 39% 16%
21 FADEL Alexander - 2% 10% 28% 37% 20% 3%
22 UEMOTO Ken - 1% 7% 20% 33% 29% 10%
23 MEYERSON Jacob - - 4% 19% 42% 35%
24 SRIVATS Vedh - 1% 6% 24% 38% 25% 5%
25 SHINCHUK Daniel - 1% 6% 21% 37% 28% 6%
26 WITCZAK Mateus - 1% 9% 32% 38% 18% 3%
27 WANG ANDREW CHANG - - - 2% 13% 42% 43%
28 SAKAYEDA Jacob 1% 13% 35% 35% 13% 2% -
29 LIEBOWITZ Carson 2% 14% 36% 34% 12% 1%
30 CLARK Gabriel - - 6% 28% 44% 22%
31 CLARK Aram - - 2% 13% 33% 38% 15%
32 LIGH Checed 1% 5% 18% 31% 29% 14% 3%
33 MCDONALD Finn - 2% 13% 31% 35% 17% 3%
34 ATWOOD Griffin - - 2% 11% 32% 38% 16%
35 SUBA Lucas - 6% 23% 38% 27% 6%
36 BROENING-CHAI Jonas 3% 18% 34% 30% 12% 2%
37 WANG Junyu - - 3% 15% 41% 40%
38 SAGE Sebastian - 4% 18% 34% 32% 11%
39 SALDARINI Glenn - 1% 6% 24% 41% 24% 4%
40 BERKOWITZ Gavin 1% 6% 18% 31% 28% 13% 3%
41 KENNEDY Tomás 3% 16% 35% 31% 13% 2% -
42 BAI Evan - 2% 10% 29% 37% 20% 3%
43 CIEMINS Henry 1% 9% 28% 36% 21% 5% -
44 BALE ATMAN - 1% 10% 35% 40% 14%
45 ALMEDA Stanislav 1% 7% 26% 40% 23% 3%
46 ZHANG Ray 4% 26% 45% 21% 4% -
47 NOTOPRADONO Nicholas - 5% 21% 37% 28% 8%
48 WEISS Toby 5% 26% 44% 21% 4% -
49 ONG Dylan 1% 9% 30% 39% 19% 2%
50 PAVLENISHVILI Luke 4% 18% 32% 28% 14% 3% -
51 JAIN Karanvir 20% 41% 29% 9% 1% - -
52 CAREY Sam 13% 35% 34% 15% 3% - -
53 GAO Kai 4% 19% 35% 29% 11% 2% -
54 MUNJULURI ruhaan - 5% 22% 38% 26% 7% 1%
55 ROSADO Sebastian 10% 34% 37% 16% 3% - -
55 ZWAKA Jonas 17% 38% 31% 12% 2% - -
57 WANG Michael - 1% 8% 24% 37% 25% 5%
58 BARENBOYM Michael 2% 17% 38% 32% 10% 1% -
59 WASCO Andrew 16% 47% 29% 7% 1% - -
60 KU Alexander 23% 44% 26% 6% 1% - -
61 GORDON Samuel 16% 38% 32% 12% 2% -
62 AROUNA Ilan 7% 29% 38% 21% 5% -
63 BAHK Caleb 15% 37% 32% 13% 2% - -
64 DE SIENA Salvatore - 2% 16% 35% 33% 12% 1%
65 WELSTEAD Nicholas 2% 15% 34% 33% 14% 2%
66 HAUSLER Jayden 49% 40% 10% 1% - -
67 LIU Alexander 8% 31% 38% 18% 4% - -
68 COGLIANO Max 10% 28% 33% 20% 7% 1% -
69 GOMEZ Emilio 8% 34% 38% 17% 3% - -
70 CHIEN Nolan 39% 41% 16% 3% - -
71 LAZARTE Gabriel 39% 44% 15% 2% - -
72 FLETCHER Logan 32% 43% 21% 4% - -
73 WANG tiger 2% 14% 32% 33% 16% 3% -
74 NIEBERGALL Jaxson - 3% 15% 33% 32% 14% 2%
75 OREN Daniel 3% 19% 38% 30% 8% 1% -
76 BRADBURY Noah 30% 43% 22% 5% 1% - -
77 YANG Byron 15% 42% 32% 10% 1% -
78 VOHRA Ekam 20% 48% 27% 5% - -
79 FIROOZI Sam 47% 40% 11% 1% - - -
80 PERRY Alexander 14% 35% 33% 15% 3% -
81 LIU ERIC 4% 19% 32% 28% 13% 3% -
81 SHINCHUK Jacob 24% 42% 25% 7% 1% - -
83 SAYAR Luke 15% 46% 31% 7% 1% -
84 MENZIES Liam 51% 39% 9% 1% - - -
85 CRAWFORD William 15% 40% 32% 11% 2% - -
85 HAIRABEDIAN Ellis 30% 44% 22% 4% - - -

Explanation

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.