NYA Sports and Fitness Center - Newtown, CT, 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 | KIM Shaun M. | - | - | - | 1% | 13% | 43% | 43% |
2 | MICLAUS Justin | - | - | - | 2% | 16% | 44% | 38% |
3 | HUANG Alex F. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 38% | 41% | 12% |
3 | OH Triton | - | - | - | 5% | 25% | 44% | 25% |
5 | BAE Jason I. | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 43% | 35% |
6 | SHOMAN Zachary | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 39% | 49% |
7 | MEYERSON Jacob | - | 4% | 21% | 40% | 28% | 6% | |
8 | MORALES Jonathan | - | - | 2% | 15% | 39% | 34% | 10% |
9 | BABAYEV Gabriel A. | - | - | - | 5% | 26% | 46% | 22% |
10 | GEFELL Andrew P. | - | - | - | 4% | 30% | 66% | |
11 | LIN Maxim | - | 3% | 15% | 38% | 38% | 7% | |
12 | NGUYEN Anthony | 1% | 10% | 30% | 37% | 19% | 4% | - |
13 | CORTEZ Christopher | - | - | 1% | 7% | 29% | 43% | 19% |
14 | DENBROEDER Ronald (Mackie) | - | 1% | 10% | 32% | 37% | 18% | 3% |
15 | WANG Daniel | - | - | 2% | 15% | 36% | 36% | 11% |
16 | BRANDT Jaden | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 37% | 18% | 2% |
17 | ANTHONY Devyn V. | - | - | 3% | 17% | 43% | 37% | |
18 | LAUB William | - | 8% | 37% | 42% | 11% | 1% | |
19 | HU Chris | - | - | - | 5% | 21% | 43% | 31% |
20 | LINDHOLM Oliver S. | - | - | 3% | 21% | 41% | 29% | 6% |
21 | LEE Andrew | - | 1% | 14% | 35% | 34% | 13% | 2% |
22 | SHOMAN Noah | - | - | 2% | 17% | 50% | 30% | |
23 | CHEN Jonathan | - | 4% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 9% | 1% |
24 | NGO Maximus | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 36% | 17% | 2% |
25 | HUANG Ethan F. | - | - | 1% | 12% | 46% | 40% | |
26 | VAROQUA Nalby | 2% | 13% | 34% | 36% | 13% | 1% | |
27 | TSAO Oliver | 2% | 15% | 36% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - |
28 | BERA Enzo | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 36% | 16% | 2% |
29 | FORMENTI Giulio | - | 1% | 8% | 31% | 39% | 18% | 3% |
30 | MICHELL Bailey | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 40% | 11% |
31 | TOZZI Massimo | 3% | 20% | 42% | 29% | 6% | - | - |
32 | SADHU Neiyam | 16% | 39% | 33% | 11% | 1% | - | |
33 | SMINK Oliver | - | 3% | 25% | 40% | 25% | 6% | 1% |
34 | PENG Bryan | - | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 43% | 17% |
35 | OH Aster | 2% | 13% | 35% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - |
36 | KIARA Kinoti | 7% | 31% | 39% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
37 | BRADLEY Raphael F. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 35% | 32% | 12% |
37 | KETT Richard | 34% | 42% | 20% | 4% | - | - | - |
39 | RODRIGUEZ Darlin | - | - | 3% | 15% | 35% | 36% | 11% |
40 | WOLMART Zander | 37% | 45% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
41 | MANESCU Miron | 3% | 34% | 41% | 18% | 3% | - | |
42 | LIN Philip T. | 1% | 11% | 41% | 38% | 9% | 1% | |
42 | FIELDS Matthew S. | - | 3% | 20% | 40% | 30% | 7% | |
44 | RYAN Kai | 1% | 13% | 36% | 35% | 13% | 2% | |
45 | DESAUTELS Connor | 7% | 31% | 40% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
46 | WITCZAK Mateus | 2% | 14% | 36% | 35% | 12% | 2% | - |
46 | PORTER Dupree | 1% | 13% | 38% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - |
48 | CLARK Gabriel | 3% | 18% | 37% | 30% | 10% | 1% | - |
49 | COOKSON Leonardo | 10% | 35% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
50 | NGO Emerson | 29% | 44% | 22% | 5% | - | - | - |
51 | HUANG Maxwell H. | 7% | 30% | 39% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
52 | KMETA-SUAREZ Graysen | 15% | 42% | 32% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
53 | WANG Jerry | 8% | 30% | 38% | 19% | 4% | - | |
54 | CHENG Brandon | 18% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | |
55 | WELSTEAD Nicholas | 13% | 53% | 29% | 5% | - | - | |
56 | SCHIMEL Luke | 15% | 39% | 32% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
57 | PEDICONE Joseph | 33% | 43% | 20% | 4% | - | - | - |
58 | ONG Dylan | 21% | 46% | 28% | 5% | - | - | - |
59 | LI Richard | - | 3% | 17% | 39% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
60 | RAJMOHAN Arya | 29% | 45% | 22% | 4% | - | - | - |
60 | YEHE-NARA William | 73% | 25% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
62 | STEVENS Flynn | 39% | 43% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
63 | TSAO Alister | 19% | 45% | 29% | 7% | - | - | - |
64 | BLACKBURN Henry | 15% | 63% | 20% | 2% | - | - | - |
65 | HERNANDEZ Stanton | - | 2% | 11% | 31% | 38% | 17% | 2% |
66 | HOWARD Demani | 70% | 28% | 3% | - | - | - | |
67 | MAPES Tanner | 80% | 18% | 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.