Division 1/Parafencing National Championships + April NAC

Div I Men's Saber

Thursday, April 25, 2024 at 8:30 AM

Salt Palace Convention Center - Salt Lake City, UT, 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 WILLIAMS Grant W. - - - - 1% 16% 83%
2 HOMER Daryl D. - - - - 1% 15% 84%
3 YEN Darren - - 1% 6% 28% 50% 15%
3 CHOI Silas - 1% 7% 21% 35% 28% 9%
5 CHON Taylor A. - - 3% 13% 30% 36% 17%
6 DOLEGIEWICZ Filip - - - - 4% 33% 63%
7 WU Roger (Mengke) - - 1% 6% 24% 43% 26%
8 SMITH Jared C. - - - 1% 8% 35% 56%
9 KIM Shaun M. - 1% 5% 18% 35% 31% 10%
10 HOLZ Daniel - 1% 5% 19% 36% 31% 9%
11 BENAVRAM Lev C. - - 1% 7% 24% 41% 26%
12 KOGAN Ben - 1% 7% 22% 35% 27% 8%
13 LIM William J. - 2% 11% 28% 34% 20% 4%
14 ATANASSOV Vasil V. - 2% 11% 28% 36% 20% 3%
15 NAZLYMOV Andrei - 1% 7% 22% 35% 26% 8%
16 SHOMAN Zachary - 1% 6% 21% 37% 28% 8%
17 ERMAKOV Lev - 1% 7% 21% 35% 28% 8%
18 ESCUETA Tony V. - - 3% 12% 31% 37% 17%
19 LEE Aydan J. - 5% 18% 34% 30% 11% 1%
20 BURGUNDER Quinten (Quin) A. - - 1% 5% 21% 41% 32%
21 WALKER Dalton F. - - - 3% 16% 41% 40%
22 HJERPE Wade H. - 2% 12% 32% 37% 16% 1%
23 WOOD Elden S. - - 1% 5% 20% 41% 33%
24 WANG Robert - - 4% 16% 34% 33% 12%
25 STURN Oliver 4% 19% 34% 29% 12% 3% -
26 VAID Luke 3% 16% 31% 30% 15% 4% -
27 TE VELDE Noah C. - - 1% 5% 21% 43% 31%
28 WITEK Bernard J. - - 1% 9% 28% 42% 20%
29 DENNER Maximilian P. - 4% 17% 35% 32% 11% -
30 HU Christopher 4% 18% 34% 29% 12% 2% -
31 MCCARTHY Gabriel 2% 14% 31% 32% 17% 4% -
32 CRAIG Samuel 3% 17% 33% 30% 14% 3% -
33 DODDO Andrew - - - - 1% 17% 81%
34 GUFFEY Christopher - 2% 12% 27% 33% 20% 5%
35 LEE Justin - 3% 14% 34% 35% 14% 1%
36 ZUBATIY Samuel - 3% 14% 32% 35% 16% 1%
37 HUANG Ethan F. - 3% 14% 33% 35% 14% 1%
38 THOMPSON Khalil A. - - - - 4% 27% 69%
39 GONZALEZ Emilio A. - - 3% 13% 31% 37% 16%
40 JIANG Anthony - 1% 8% 25% 36% 24% 5%
41 BERRIO Carter E. - 2% 11% 28% 35% 20% 4%
42 LE Hayden - 5% 18% 33% 30% 13% 2%
43 HUANG Alex F. 1% 10% 25% 33% 22% 7% 1%
44 ROBERTS Sam - 1% 7% 26% 41% 23% 2%
45 PI Alexander 1% 10% 28% 36% 20% 5% -
46 SHIRPAL Oleksandr 4% 20% 38% 28% 9% 1% -
47 CHAN Matthew - 2% 11% 28% 35% 20% 4%
48 ERMAKOV Semeon 5% 22% 36% 26% 9% 1% -
49 WANG Nicolas 1% 7% 22% 34% 26% 9% 1%
50 WILSON Jude 1% 7% 25% 37% 25% 6%
51 GEFELL Andrew P. - 3% 15% 34% 35% 13%
52 KALPATHY Rohit 16% 39% 31% 12% 2% -
53 SHOMAN Noah - 3% 15% 33% 34% 14% 1%
53 HOLZ William A. - 2% 10% 27% 35% 21% 5%
55 BYON Adrian 9% 29% 35% 20% 6% 1% -
56 CHEONG Heonjun - 4% 16% 33% 32% 13% 2%
57 OH Triton - 2% 11% 27% 33% 21% 5%
57 PRIMUS Nazir 1% 6% 21% 33% 27% 11% 2%
59 HONG Rubin 8% 28% 37% 21% 5% - -
60 FREYRE DE ANDRADE Elian R. 1% 5% 19% 33% 29% 11% 1%
61 KUSHKOV Daniel 24% 42% 26% 7% 1% -
62 LIN Maxim 5% 22% 36% 26% 9% 1% -
63 REN James 1% 5% 19% 34% 29% 11% 1%
64 MIYASAKI-CASTRO Masanobu 6% 23% 34% 26% 10% 2% -
65 BABAYEV Gabriel A. - 1% 7% 26% 40% 24% 2%
66 BAE Jason I. - 1% 7% 20% 34% 29% 10%
67 KWALWASSER Eric - 2% 10% 27% 35% 21% 4%
68 LIANG Connor - - 2% 11% 29% 39% 19%
69 PIWOWAR Alex 6% 25% 37% 24% 7% 1% -
70 SU Landon 3% 15% 32% 33% 15% 3% -
71 YAN William 4% 19% 34% 29% 12% 2% -
72 TAO Jeffrey 2% 14% 31% 32% 16% 4% -
72 KILARI Krish 12% 33% 35% 17% 3% - -
74 SAVOY Luca 8% 28% 35% 21% 6% 1% -
75 MICLAUS Justin - 1% 8% 24% 36% 25% 6%
76 GLOZMAN Justin 5% 21% 35% 27% 11% 2% -
77 PRIEST Leighton K. - - 2% 11% 30% 38% 18%
77 PATEL Rayn 8% 27% 36% 23% 7% 1% -
79 TIAGI Daniel 25% 42% 25% 7% 1% - -
80 MICHELL Bailey 1% 5% 19% 33% 28% 12% 2%
80 QIU Nathan 3% 15% 32% 31% 15% 4% -
80 ROE Finnegan 10% 31% 35% 18% 5% 1% -
83 STATEN-LUSTY Silas J. - 1% 4% 17% 35% 32% 11%
84 YAN Kevin 7% 25% 35% 23% 8% 1% -
85 MATTOO Deven 26% 41% 25% 7% 1% - -
85 PENG Bryan 1% 9% 28% 37% 21% 4% -
85 DEPEW Spencer 4% 21% 35% 28% 10% 2% -
88 CHTERENTAL Alex 1% 7% 24% 35% 25% 8% 1%
89 MEHAN Nicholas 3% 17% 32% 29% 14% 3% -
90 LUO George F. 2% 12% 30% 34% 18% 4% -
90 MARGULIES William 1% 6% 21% 35% 27% 9% 1%
92 ZENG Noah 2% 14% 34% 34% 14% 2% -
93 YANG Ziyi - 2% 9% 26% 36% 22% 5%
93 GOLDIN Lucca 18% 40% 30% 10% 1% - -
95 KIM ELIJAH 6% 23% 35% 25% 9% 1% -
96 BARRIOS Diego 13% 34% 33% 16% 4% - -
97 SO Hananiah - 4% 18% 35% 32% 11%
98 FENG Leo 1% 10% 29% 36% 19% 4%
99 JOO Jeein 2% 12% 30% 33% 18% 4% -
100 KIM Ethan 1% 7% 22% 33% 26% 10% 2%
101 JEFFORDS Alexander - 4% 15% 31% 32% 15% 2%
102 SUGIURA Samuel 22% 42% 27% 8% 1% - -
103 VAROQUA Nalby 22% 39% 28% 9% 2% - -
104 SO Preston 18% 40% 30% 10% 1% - -
105 MAY Griffin M. 12% 34% 35% 16% 4% - -
105 LIN Daniel 2% 14% 31% 32% 16% 4% -
107 MUNGUIA Nathan 9% 28% 35% 21% 6% 1% -
108 PASTORE LIU Vince 4% 20% 34% 28% 11% 2% -
109 NG Jonathan 7% 26% 36% 23% 7% 1% -
110 RAMANAN Jaisimh 11% 32% 35% 18% 4% - -
111 KANG Evan 19% 40% 29% 10% 1% - -
112 CHEN Jonathan 20% 38% 29% 11% 2% - -
113 MATTOO Surya 14% 37% 33% 13% 3% - -
114 DUDNICK Christian 14% 34% 33% 15% 3% - -
115 TONG ZACHARY 1% 6% 20% 34% 28% 10% 1%
116 RIGHTLER Samuel 1% 10% 28% 37% 21% 4% -
117 YUN Jaesun - < 1% 3% 14% 33% 37% 13%
118 SHAHZAD Azlan A. 15% 35% 32% 14% 3% - -
119 HOTHA Nikhil 15% 37% 33% 13% 2% - -
120 DODRILL Grant - < 1% 5% 20% 40% 30% 4%
120 KROON Lucas 19% 38% 30% 11% 2% - -
120 BOSITA Carson 17% 39% 31% 11% 2% - -
123 CHAVES Matthew J. 2% 13% 31% 33% 17% 4% -
124 YANG Dylan 14% 33% 32% 16% 4% 1% -
124 RAMANAN Govind 5% 22% 37% 26% 8% 1% -
126 FELDMAN Drew 27% 41% 24% 7% 1% - -
127 GHAYALOD ansh 2% 12% 31% 35% 17% 2% -
128 SOWERS Samuel 22% 41% 27% 8% 1% - -
129 KATZ Ryan 25% 41% 26% 8% 1% - -
130 PATIL Aaryan A. 3% 15% 31% 31% 16% 4% -
131 FIELDS Matthew S. 9% 29% 35% 20% 6% 1% -
132 SUBBIAH Prashanth V. 1% 6% 21% 34% 27% 10% 1%
133 LUHAN Zachary 5% 22% 35% 27% 9% 1% -
134 BYON Julian 7% 28% 37% 22% 6% 1% -
135 MAKLIN Edward P. 3% 19% 36% 30% 11% 2% -
135 KANG Evan R. 6% 23% 35% 25% 9% 2% -
137 ROSBERG Dashiell W. 9% 29% 35% 20% 6% 1% -
138 GERSTMANN Max T. 21% 38% 28% 10% 2% - -
139 DENBROEDER Ronald (Mackie) 13% 34% 33% 16% 4% 1% -

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.