Danvers Indoor Sports - Danvers, 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 | 6 | ||
| 1 | LIU Adam | - | - | - | - | 3% | 23% | 74% |
| 2 | TESFAYE Elias | - | 3% | 17% | 38% | 33% | 9% | |
| 3 | SONG Aidan | - | 1% | 8% | 31% | 43% | 17% | |
| 3 | HENNESSY Levon | 3% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 2% | |
| 5 | TRAN Spencer | - | - | 1% | 7% | 33% | 60% | |
| 6 | KABA Elias | - | - | 4% | 21% | 44% | 31% | |
| 7 | SINGLETON Aman | - | - | 2% | 14% | 39% | 45% | |
| 8 | GU Eric | 6% | 28% | 41% | 20% | 4% | - | |
| 9 | KIM Remington | 1% | 9% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 4% | |
| 10 | LEE Harrison | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% | |
| 11 | CAFASSO Alexander | 1% | 7% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 6% | |
| 12 | SZCZAPA Lukas | - | 1% | 6% | 26% | 43% | 24% | |
| 13 | HELMY Richard | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 41% | 25% | |
| 14 | ARMSTRONG Payson | - | 5% | 23% | 40% | 28% | 4% | |
| 15 | ZHANG Jonathan | 4% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 11% | 1% | |
| 16 | WANG-SONG Evan | - | 2% | 13% | 31% | 37% | 17% | |
| 17 | BO Genero | - | 3% | 13% | 31% | 36% | 16% | 1% |
| 18 | MASSE Dean | 9% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 19 | MANSFIELD Hunter | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | |
| 20 | MOZZER Nolan | 4% | 19% | 35% | 29% | 11% | 1% | |
| 21 | WITHERELL Logan | 2% | 11% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 22 | CHEN Evan | - | 5% | 23% | 41% | 26% | 5% | |
| 23 | HANNA Alexander | 10% | 31% | 36% | 19% | 4% | - | |
| 24 | CHEN Daniel | 2% | 17% | 37% | 32% | 11% | 1% | |
| 24 | AU Joshua | 31% | 44% | 21% | 4% | - | - | |
| 26 | ZHENG Jason | 11% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - | |
| 27 | SHAO Mason | 3% | 19% | 41% | 29% | 8% | 1% | |
| 28 | PARIGIAN Alexander | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 38% | 20% | 2% |
| 29 | CHEN Tianjun | 6% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 30 | ROBINSON Garrett | 9% | 30% | 36% | 20% | 5% | - | |
| 31 | CHEN Cameron | 15% | 41% | 32% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 32 | HOLCOMB Liam | 8% | 28% | 36% | 22% | 6% | 1% | |
| 33 | DAI Jason | 5% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 7% | - | |
| 34 | SHI Evan | 38% | 44% | 16% | 2% | - | - | |
| 35 | GILLARD Adan | 3% | 20% | 38% | 29% | 9% | 1% | |
| 36 | YOON Jonathan | 25% | 42% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 37 | MANUEL Eli | 1% | 13% | 32% | 35% | 17% | 3% | |
| 38 | CIANCHETTA David | 19% | 46% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 38 | WILLIAMS Gavin | 38% | 42% | 17% | 3% | - | - | |
| 40 | LAZORISAK Andrew | - | 1% | 10% | 33% | 41% | 16% | |
| 41 | WU Matthew | 6% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 8% | 1% | |
| 42 | BRESLAV Asher | 17% | 37% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 43 | HUFF Alexander | 2% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 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.