November NAC

Cadet Men's Foil

Saturday, November 9, 2024 at 2:00 PM

Kentucky International Convention Center - Louisville, KY, 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 XU Jia Bao (Bowen) - - - - 2% 26% 72%
2 SIU Aiden - - - - 1% 16% 83%
3 YANG Luao - - - - - 11% 88%
3 CO Dylan - - - 3% 29% 68%
5 QIAN Jason H. - - - 1% 6% 32% 61%
6 LIN Michael - - - 1% 6% 32% 61%
7 TIYA BIAYA K. - - - 1% 10% 41% 48%
8 PARRISH Evan - - 3% 17% 40% 34% 6%
9 CANLAS Nathan - - - 1% 6% 32% 61%
10 GUERRA Gabriel H. - - - - 7% 35% 58%
11 WANG Aaron - - 2% 13% 40% 45%
12 TANG Owen S. - - - - 5% 31% 63%
13 LI Toby - - 1% 10% 31% 40% 17%
14 YU Jason - - - 3% 21% 47% 29%
15 GULCHIN Mark (Yerma) - 1% 6% 21% 36% 29% 8%
16 CHEN Charlie Tian-You - - 5% 21% 38% 28% 7%
17 LIU Jinning - - - 1% 7% 34% 58%
18 WONG Adrian - - - 1% 8% 36% 56%
18 CHEN Matthew - - 4% 20% 40% 30% 5%
20 DERRICK Blake - - - 3% 17% 42% 38%
21 WU Alistair - - 1% 8% 32% 48% 12%
21 LU Royce - - 1% 5% 22% 44% 28%
23 SENIC Lucas - - 2% 16% 43% 39%
24 SONG Noel - - 4% 21% 43% 32%
25 NGUYEN Martin - - 1% 10% 31% 41% 17%
26 SHAO Eric - - 4% 19% 39% 32% 5%
27 DESHMUKH Arjun - - - 1% 8% 36% 55%
27 WANG Zhenyong - - - - 2% 20% 79%
29 CHEN Kyle P. - - 5% 24% 48% 23%
29 RAJ Jay - 1% 12% 46% 36% 5%
31 LIU Derek - - 1% 11% 45% 43%
32 SISINNI Riccardo - - - - 4% 31% 65%
33 NICOLETTI Luca - - - 1% 11% 57% 31%
34 COELHO Cristiano P. - - - - 5% 31% 64%
35 LIN James G. - - - - 5% 31% 63%
36 WU Alber Y. - - - 2% 17% 43% 38%
37 YAO Bradley - - 5% 22% 39% 27% 6%
38 TAN Aidan - - 1% 7% 25% 42% 26%
39 LING Eddie - - 2% 14% 41% 40% 4%
40 SUAREZ Adrian - 1% 8% 30% 42% 19%
41 RASMUSSEN Sage - - 2% 15% 42% 41%
42 TANG August L. - - 2% 18% 51% 29%
43 ZHOU Chenqiao - 1% 10% 32% 40% 17% 1%
44 LO Preston - - 1% 10% 32% 40% 16%
45 CHO Jadon Yushin - - 1% 10% 31% 40% 18%
46 LIN Youlong - - - - 4% 40% 56%
47 XU Andy P. - - 3% 14% 34% 36% 13%
48 DOELL Ethan - 1% 8% 26% 38% 23% 3%
49 ZHANG Jacob - - 2% 14% 37% 37% 11%
50 LEE Brendan - - - 1% 10% 40% 49%
51 ZHAO Adam - 1% 10% 29% 37% 19% 2%
52 CHEN Junlin - - 1% 6% 25% 44% 24%
53 ROZALSKI Eli - 1% 6% 23% 37% 27% 6%
54 WONG Yuheng Isaac - 2% 13% 32% 36% 16% 2%
55 DINSAY Kristjan - 1% 7% 26% 42% 24%
56 ZHENG Marcus 2% 18% 38% 31% 10% 1%
57 LIU Ethan - - 1% 5% 24% 44% 26%
58 CHOI Ethan - - 1% 6% 28% 47% 18%
59 MATSAKH Philip - - - 5% 23% 44% 28%
60 KIM Brian - 1% 8% 29% 41% 20% 2%
61 SHAPIRO Leon - - 8% 39% 44% 8%
62 OZAWA Taishi 1% 9% 33% 43% 13% 1%
63 ALLEN Henry G. - - 4% 22% 43% 27% 4%
64 MARTIN Darius - - 3% 21% 41% 28% 6%
65 HOOSHI Jayden C. - - - - - 9% 90%
66 PARK Rion - - 1% 10% 35% 42% 12%
67 WONG Garrick G. - - 1% 6% 24% 43% 27%
68 BADROEL RIZWAN Uzair Zafran - - - 3% 20% 47% 30%
69 XU Xinhao ( Sonny) - - 2% 13% 44% 42%
69 BUDOVSKYI Borys - - - 6% 32% 61%
71 ZHANG Aaron - - 2% 12% 33% 38% 15%
72 WEI Qiancheng (Matt) - - - 1% 8% 36% 55%
73 CORTRIGHT Skipper - - - 5% 25% 44% 25%
74 KIM Daniel Y. - - 2% 14% 35% 36% 12%
75 BAE Eugene - 1% 12% 36% 35% 14% 2%
76 CHEN Ethan - - 3% 18% 39% 33% 6%
76 HOWLAND Jonas - 2% 11% 28% 35% 20% 4%
78 LI Bradley - - 1% 7% 25% 41% 25%
79 DAI Christopher - 5% 29% 44% 19% 2% -
80 LIU Zixian (Aaron) - 2% 12% 32% 37% 16% 2%
81 YI William W. - - 4% 21% 41% 28% 5%
82 CHENG Logan - 2% 13% 33% 34% 15% 2%
83 LEE Jonah - - 5% 23% 44% 28%
84 KIM Harrison - 1% 13% 37% 38% 11%
85 LI Edison M. 2% 18% 39% 30% 9% 1%
86 YUE Jackson 9% 41% 36% 12% 2% -
87 TANG Alexander L. - - 2% 13% 40% 38% 7%
88 LU Kevin - - 3% 18% 44% 34% 2%
89 SHENG Dalton - - 3% 17% 39% 34% 7%
90 BOESKIN Nolan - - 6% 27% 43% 21% 3%
91 PINCHENG Yao - - 6% 29% 40% 21% 4%
92 LE Jacob H. - - 6% 29% 44% 20% 1%
93 CHA James 18% 40% 30% 10% 1% - -
94 YOON Junhyeok - 1% 7% 25% 39% 23% 4%
95 WONG Evan - 4% 20% 39% 28% 8% 1%
96 GHEDINI Luca - - 3% 18% 40% 32% 6%
97 LI Aaron - - 1% 7% 27% 43% 21%
98 XIE Buster - 2% 15% 40% 34% 9% -
99 GUTH Joseph - - 1% 8% 37% 45% 8%
100 CHEN Hanson - - 1% 10% 30% 40% 19%
101 LI Samuel - - 4% 22% 44% 27% 3%
102 MATTOS Luis Felipe 1% 16% 40% 32% 10% 1% -
103 HUANG Eythan - - 6% 26% 40% 23% 3%
104 ELKOUSY Zain al Din - 6% 24% 38% 24% 6% 1%
105 WANG Brian - 1% 9% 30% 41% 17% 2%
106 CHEUNG Hank - 1% 6% 26% 44% 24%
107 FEDELI Francesco 3% 16% 36% 32% 12% 1%
108 ZHOU Ryan 3% 16% 35% 33% 12% 1%
109 MAZAHERI Fletcher - 3% 16% 39% 33% 9%
110 MORROW Brenden - 4% 19% 37% 31% 9%
111 LEE Christopher T. - 1% 9% 34% 40% 15% 1%
112 RAUTUREAU Arthur - 6% 28% 39% 22% 5% -
113 TANG Albert - - 1% 5% 23% 43% 28%
114 PALMA Nathan Anthony - 2% 14% 32% 34% 15% 2%
115 CHUANG Oscar - - 3% 19% 47% 28% 3%
116 WEI JR Shan 1% 15% 43% 32% 8% 1% -
117 YANG Charles - 2% 15% 40% 33% 9% 1%
118 ZAIDI Adil 3% 22% 39% 27% 8% 1% -
119 HAYES Stewart - 3% 17% 35% 32% 12% 1%
120 CLARK Benjamin 1% 13% 35% 34% 15% 3% -
121 SEMAPAKDI-CHANG Kaiden - 1% 9% 31% 40% 19% 1%
122 FUKUDA Diego - 1% 9% 31% 41% 18%
123 RAUTUREAU Hugo - 4% 20% 38% 30% 8%
123 FOURNET-FAYARD Aldric - 13% 36% 36% 13% 1%
125 HUANG Jonathan - 4% 18% 38% 32% 7%
126 RODRIGUEZ Tyler - 3% 16% 35% 33% 13% 1%
127 NAIR Sujit 2% 27% 48% 19% 3% - -
128 MARISI Gabriel 1% 7% 24% 37% 25% 7% -
129 FENG Michael - - 5% 21% 40% 29% 4%
130 QIU Zhaocheng - 1% 10% 28% 38% 19% 3%
131 PONS Diego - 3% 16% 36% 35% 11%
132 WANG Rory - - 1% 13% 42% 41% 2%
133 GUO Justin - - 1% 18% 46% 29% 5%
134 YIN Zixin(Gavin) - 5% 22% 38% 27% 7% -
135 GRIFFITH MCALLISTER Thomas - 1% 6% 24% 41% 24% 4%
136 BI Ryan - 2% 16% 41% 32% 8% -
137 BERNARD Cohen 1% 12% 34% 35% 15% 3% -
138 ZHEN Ethan - - 2% 14% 39% 38% 8%
139 LING Carson Jr 1% 13% 33% 34% 15% 3% -
140 PAN Ethan 1% 11% 38% 36% 12% 2% -
141 ZENG Rick - 3% 17% 36% 32% 11% 1%
142 TEH Tang-Ngu 2% 17% 41% 32% 8% 1% -
143 XIE Jicheng 5% 22% 38% 27% 7% 1% -
144 CHOI Ethan - 5% 21% 38% 28% 8% -
145 WONG Jacob W. 3% 26% 40% 24% 6% 1% -
146 CHO Xzander - 3% 16% 42% 35% 5% -
147 TALASILA Arush - 2% 12% 35% 39% 12%
148 SIMONOV Timofey - 4% 24% 42% 25% 5%
149 LEE Jaden 1% 19% 41% 30% 8% 1%
150 UYPECKCUAT Maximillian Trajan 12% 37% 36% 13% 2% -
151 COPELAND Nigel 4% 25% 40% 25% 6% 1%
152 BAI Brian - 8% 29% 39% 20% 3%
153 KETTELLE John - 1% 8% 26% 37% 23% 5%
154 TRAUGOT Owen G. - - - < 1% 6% 31% 63%
155 CHANG Eric Jonathan 3% 24% 41% 26% 6% 1% -
156 CHENG Ethan - - 3% 19% 39% 31% 8%
157 VOLLMER Quintin - 1% 12% 37% 36% 13% 1%
158 LEE Eugene - 2% 11% 29% 36% 20% 3%
159 HICKEY Connor 1% 6% 22% 36% 26% 8% 1%
160 SRINIVASAN Vedant - - 5% 25% 47% 22% 1%
161 JIANG Bowang - 2% 12% 33% 38% 13% 1%
162 LIU Yinhong 1% 13% 39% 34% 12% 1% -
163 BIELER Mason - - 10% 47% 34% 8% 1%
164 TSAY Jordan R. 6% 24% 36% 24% 8% 1% -
164 CHEN Nuo - - 2% 12% 33% 38% 15%
166 ARAVINDAKSHA Ayaan - 7% 30% 41% 19% 3% -
167 EDWARDS Maxon - - 5% 26% 41% 23% 4%
168 YU William 1% 10% 33% 38% 15% 2% -
168 SUAREZ David - 5% 24% 43% 25% 2% -
168 CHANG Nathan 1% 11% 34% 36% 16% 3% -
171 VANOYEN Dominick - 2% 12% 32% 37% 16% 2%
172 FOY Grant 7% 47% 35% 9% 1% - -
173 LIM EUNSEONG - 4% 25% 44% 23% 4% -
174 KUE Temujin 3% 20% 38% 29% 9% 1% -
175 HAN Alexander 1% 11% 30% 35% 19% 4% -
176 LIU William - 4% 22% 41% 28% 4%
177 TANG Terry 1% 8% 28% 39% 21% 4%
178 YANG Dylan - 17% 39% 32% 10% 1%
179 WONG Braxton 18% 40% 31% 10% 1% -
180 SHANNON Jack 4% 28% 40% 22% 5% -
181 MAVANI Krishna 10% 33% 38% 17% 2% -
182 LI Daniel 11% 36% 38% 13% 1% -
183 XU Ethan - 6% 28% 41% 22% 3%
184 ONG Nicholas 5% 31% 40% 20% 4% -
185 DHOKTE Neev 3% 30% 50% 15% 1% -
186 LI Richard - 8% 34% 40% 17% 2%
187 HUA Aaron 3% 17% 37% 32% 9% 1%
188 HUYNH Matthew 23% 42% 27% 7% 1% -
189 SLUSHER Gideon - 5% 21% 37% 27% 8% 1%
190 ZHAO Nathan - 7% 26% 38% 23% 6% -
191 CHEN Anson 3% 18% 36% 31% 10% 1% -
192 FANG Haoyu 1% 12% 34% 35% 15% 3% -
193 HERNANDEZ BERRON Salvador 2% 13% 36% 35% 12% 2% -
194 PE Noah 3% 28% 40% 23% 6% 1% -
195 SHIN Noah 2% 17% 38% 32% 10% 1% -
196 HUTH Trevor 1% 8% 24% 35% 24% 8% 1%
197 ONIK Ari N. 1% 11% 40% 37% 10% 1% -
198 JIN Andy 10% 44% 36% 9% 1% - -
199 SHEVCHENKO Kostiantyn - 5% 20% 36% 28% 10% 1%
200 KIM Teo 7% 31% 41% 18% 3% - -
201 MCMILLIAN Harrison 33% 43% 20% 4% - - -
202 TANG Royce 7% 28% 37% 22% 5% 1% -
202 NUCKLES Caden 1% 20% 60% 17% 1% - -
204 MAO Lucas - 1% 10% 29% 38% 20% 2%
204 BLACK Zachary - 3% 16% 36% 33% 12% 1%
206 MCKEE Calvin 4% 21% 37% 28% 9% 1% -
207 STAFFORD Gareth 14% 37% 34% 13% 2% - -
208 TSOI Spencer 5% 24% 37% 25% 8% 1% -
208 ZHONG Maxwell - 4% 17% 35% 32% 11% 1%
208 METZ Mason 2% 17% 41% 33% 8% 1% -
211 EDWARDS Connor 20% 49% 27% 4% - - -
212 TOOMRE Kai 7% 40% 38% 13% 2% - -
212 FUKUDA Brando 3% 25% 44% 22% 5% - -
214 SISINNI Leonardo 5% 27% 40% 22% 5% 1% -
215 POPOKH Luca 35% 44% 18% 3% - - -
216 ZHOU Shawn 2% 19% 38% 29% 10% 1% -
217 KIM Jonah 7% 34% 39% 17% 3% - -
218 SUN Ryan - 3% 15% 34% 33% 13% 1%
218 ZHANG Hanru 2% 15% 34% 32% 14% 3% -
220 PETROV Mikhail 1% 21% 39% 28% 9% 1% -
221 WANG Elijah (QiChen) 11% 35% 36% 15% 3% - -
222 WEI Winston 16% 40% 31% 11% 2% - -
223 ZMUDA Aiden 8% 40% 39% 12% 1% - -
224 PARK William 8% 29% 36% 21% 6% 1% -
225 ZAPPALA Nikolai 2% 20% 46% 27% 6% - -
226 TAM Kyle 4% 25% 46% 22% 4% - -
227 ZHANG GAVIN J 5% 23% 38% 25% 8% 1% -
228 WEBSTER Liam 29% 44% 22% 5% - - -
229 JIMENEZ Naveen 1% 11% 35% 38% 14% 1%
230 CHEN Kelton 18% 42% 32% 8% 1% -
231 ZAHRAN Aiden 60% 34% 5% - - -
232 ZHANG Andrew 23% 43% 27% 6% 1% -
233 ROSE Zavier 65% 30% 4% - - -
234 MCCONKEY Tristan 61% 33% 6% 1% - -
235 HE Ian 9% 49% 36% 6% - -
236 YEVDAYEV Tamir 20% 44% 28% 7% 1% - -
237 MORALES Isaac 18% 40% 30% 10% 2% - -
238 VADEN Oliver - 1% 10% 33% 39% 16% 1%
238 POWELL Sean 4% 31% 45% 17% 3% - -
240 SICAT Justin 9% 37% 37% 14% 3% - -
240 GREENE Amit 21% 51% 24% 4% - - -
242 LATORRE Leonardo 11% 40% 34% 12% 2% - -
243 KARLEKAR Ved 15% 63% 21% 1% - - -
244 SURESH Rohan - 5% 27% 40% 22% 5% -
245 ABRAMKIN Tim 1% 16% 37% 33% 11% 1% -
245 PARK Andrew 5% 24% 40% 24% 6% 1% -
245 GAO Andrew Gao 24% 42% 26% 7% 1% - -
248 WANDJI Noah - 4% 23% 40% 26% 6% -
248 XU Brian 21% 46% 27% 6% 1% - -
250 QIAN Zekai 28% 43% 23% 6% 1% - -
250 HONG Edwin 18% 40% 30% 10% 2% - -
252 FOGELSON Hugh 9% 39% 38% 13% 1% - -
252 HART-SYED declan 18% 42% 30% 8% 1% - -
254 HUANG Chenghan 5% 45% 39% 9% 1% - -
255 PLUMMER Waylon 20% 40% 29% 9% 1% - -
256 COSSROW Alex 29% 44% 22% 5% - - -
257 YOU Martin 50% 38% 10% 1% - - -
258 MASSIMINO Andrew 3% 24% 44% 24% 5% - -
259 SUNDSTROM Wren 20% 43% 29% 7% 1% - -
260 LEE Christopher 9% 49% 34% 8% 1% - -
261 SUN Neo 59% 35% 6% - - - -
261 GE Felix Fei 1% 15% 36% 33% 13% 2% -
263 SHAW eric 53% 39% 7% - - - -
264 LI Lucas 2% 18% 38% 30% 10% 1% -
265 KAGAN Noah 51% 39% 10% 1% - - -
266 GRIGORIEV Michael 5% 29% 39% 21% 5% 1% -
267 KAYE Ben 67% 28% 4% - - - -
268 SHI Boris 9% 41% 38% 12% 2% - -
269 LEONG Wilson Hua 54% 37% 8% 1% - - -
270 GRIGORYAN Erik 55% 38% 7% - - - -
271 SONG Yuxuan Austin 27% 52% 19% 2% - - -
272 SEIGEL Duncan 62% 32% 6% - - -
273 MIRON Ioachim 25% 45% 25% 5% - -
274 ZHANG Matthew 2% 20% 39% 29% 9% 1%
274 BAI Austin 14% 37% 34% 13% 2% -
276 MANIKTALA Suvir 15% 39% 34% 11% 1% -
276 FRASER Rhys 14% 38% 35% 12% 1% -
278 QU Richard 19% 38% 29% 11% 2% - -
279 KO Caleb 2% 13% 34% 35% 14% 2% -
280 CHENG Mason 63% 31% 5% - - -
281 HOLCOMB Alexander 51% 38% 10% 1% - - -
282 CHAN Joseph 17% 53% 26% 5% - -
283 NOFZIGER Bennett 3% 17% 37% 31% 11% 1% -
283 YE Jerry 20% 41% 29% 9% 1% - -
285 YOUNG Jack 72% 26% 2% - - -
286 ZHENG Austin 65% 29% 5% - - - -
287 WILLIAMS Matthew 46% 43% 10% 1% - - -
287 HASTINGS Alex 70% 27% 3% - - - -
287 BHARDWAJ Ranbir 26% 45% 24% 5% - - -
290 DEPP Edward 60% 33% 7% 1% - - -
290 THIYAGARAJAA Ari 14% 49% 30% 6% 1% - -
290 KARPMAN Benny 78% 20% 2% - - - -
293 BRADFORD-WATT Ezra 89% 10% - - - -
294 CHENUTULA Abhinav 74% 25% 1% - - - -
294 PERKINS Nathaniel 80% 19% 1% - - - -
296 MOLDOVEANU Roman 62% 33% 5% - - - -
296 HU Daniel 65% 29% 5% - - - -
296 LEE Aeden 78% 21% 1% - - - -
299 WU Thomas 17% 50% 28% 5% - - -
299 DAVIS Thoren 71% 26% 3% - - - -
301 CHAN Kyle Si Tin 85% 14% 1% - - - -
302 DAVIS Walter 63% 32% 5% - - - -
302 SGOUROS Keane 48% 43% 8% 1% - - -
304 GOGOI Kavi 64% 31% 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.