Brandeis University - Boston, MA, 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 | ||
1 | ZHAO Brian | - | 1% | 6% | 26% | 43% | 24% |
2 | ZHUANG Chuanxuan | - | 1% | 5% | 21% | 41% | 32% |
3 | RIPA Joseph K. | - | 5% | 25% | 45% | 23% | 2% |
3 | ABRAMKIN Tim | - | 2% | 13% | 35% | 37% | 12% |
5 | CHUA Kirby | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 42% | 15% |
6 | SOLOPOULOS James | 1% | 7% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 5% |
7 | COPE Nathaniel | - | - | 1% | 9% | 44% | 46% |
8 | BATRA-BANG Jonah | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 29% | 5% |
9 | BAKSHI Aman | - | - | 4% | 25% | 45% | 25% |
10 | LAO Kevin | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 15% |
11 | KROLEWSKI Alexander | 1% | 10% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 3% |
12 | DENG Kenny | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 42% | 19% |
13 | SFINTESCU Alex | 2% | 14% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 2% |
14 | CUTLER Andrew | - | - | 3% | 18% | 42% | 37% |
15 | CANEDO James | 1% | 10% | 28% | 36% | 20% | 4% |
16 | LIGH Thomas | - | - | 1% | 11% | 41% | 47% |
17 | MOO Gareth G. | - | - | - | 6% | 34% | 60% |
18 | SAMMATARO Corey | 1% | 10% | 30% | 39% | 18% | 2% |
19 | ABRAMSOHN Seth | - | - | 4% | 19% | 42% | 34% |
20 | CHUN Zachary | 12% | 38% | 35% | 13% | 2% | - |
20 | FORTES PINA Adrian | 3% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
22 | MCENTEE Owen | 3% | 20% | 41% | 28% | 8% | 1% |
23 | KONDOR James | 2% | 17% | 37% | 32% | 11% | 1% |
24 | BUCOURT Vincent | - | 3% | 17% | 38% | 33% | 9% |
25 | AMRANI David | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 43% | 18% |
26 | GROSPERRIN Eugene | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 41% | 25% |
26 | XU Brian | 10% | 36% | 38% | 14% | 2% | - |
28 | MCCALL Aidan | 7% | 28% | 38% | 22% | 5% | - |
29 | GODOVICH David | - | 5% | 22% | 40% | 27% | 6% |
30 | JEFF Ariff | 3% | 18% | 39% | 32% | 7% | - |
31 | MAGAZU Christopher | 9% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 6% | 1% |
32 | WAYBRIGHT Matteo | 4% | 20% | 38% | 29% | 9% | 1% |
33 | TIBBETTS Justin | - | - | 6% | 28% | 45% | 21% |
34 | POLLIO Benjamin | 10% | 35% | 38% | 15% | 2% | - |
35 | BERETICH Brian | 1% | 19% | 43% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
36 | ARRISON Alexandrew C. | 2% | 15% | 35% | 33% | 13% | 2% |
37 | YANG David | - | 1% | 10% | 34% | 44% | 11% |
38 | CROWDER Andrew E. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 43% | 33% |
39 | SABATINO Patrick | 3% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 2% |
40 | DEROSA Patrick | 17% | 42% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - |
41 | LIGH Jack | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 25% |
42 | O'CONNOR Aidan | 15% | 41% | 32% | 10% | 1% | - |
43 | GOODMAN Elliott | 11% | 35% | 37% | 15% | 2% | - |
44 | WEINTROUB Ezra | 1% | 10% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 4% |
45 | VASIGHI Karen | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 41% | 21% |
46 | LAI Aaron | 8% | 30% | 39% | 19% | 4% | - |
47 | GRASSIE James | - | 5% | 24% | 42% | 25% | 5% |
48 | WILSON Samuel S. | - | 1% | 11% | 36% | 41% | 12% |
49 | BISHOP Henry | 2% | 13% | 33% | 36% | 15% | 2% |
50 | PAN Brian | 3% | 19% | 36% | 29% | 11% | 1% |
51 | SHECKMAN Willow | 6% | 31% | 42% | 18% | 3% | - |
52 | REN Leo B. | 6% | 33% | 41% | 17% | 2% | - |
53 | BRENNAN Connor | 43% | 40% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
54 | GRAEF Richard | 47% | 42% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
55 | KELLEY Zebulon | 11% | 31% | 35% | 18% | 5% | - |
56 | WALSH Frederic | 20% | 41% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - |
57 | PACHECO Anthony | 17% | 37% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - |
58 | WALZ Nolan | 28% | 45% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
59 | URISMAN Jacob | 5% | 34% | 40% | 18% | 3% | - |
60 | COHEN Maxwell | 64% | 32% | 4% | - | - | - |
61 | FOCHESATO Eric | 41% | 44% | 14% | 1% | - | - |
62 | BROGAN Kevin | 17% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - |
63 | CHUN Alexander | 74% | 23% | 2% | - | - | - |
63 | BRENNAN Joshua | 30% | 45% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
65 | DEVINE Colin | 1% | 18% | 41% | 31% | 9% | 1% |
66 | STOKES CARDENTE Isaiah | 22% | 44% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
67 | POLITE Isaac | 2% | 14% | 34% | 34% | 14% | 2% |
67 | HILLIER Jonathan | 1% | 37% | 45% | 16% | 2% | - |
69 | COLEMAN Ari | 4% | 23% | 39% | 26% | 7% | - |
69 | BARIOU Lincoln | 2% | 21% | 45% | 26% | 6% | - |
71 | HART Christopher | 2% | 19% | 49% | 26% | 4% | - |
72 | STRICKLAND Harrison | 1% | 18% | 39% | 31% | 9% | 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.