Rockland Community College, Eugene Levy Field House - Suffern, NY, 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 | CHEN Kyle P. | - | - | - | 3% | 15% | 41% | 41% |
2 | ARCE Andrew W. | - | - | 3% | 16% | 38% | 35% | 8% |
3 | YAO Bradley | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 36% | 56% |
3 | SHENG Dalton | - | - | - | - | 3% | 27% | 70% |
5 | CHEN Hanson | - | - | 1% | 7% | 35% | 57% | |
6 | LEE Jonah | - | - | - | - | 5% | 37% | 57% |
7 | SURESH Rohan | - | - | 2% | 10% | 31% | 41% | 16% |
8 | SALEH Omar | - | - | 5% | 21% | 38% | 29% | 7% |
9 | LU Andy | - | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 44% | 13% |
10 | JIMENEZ Naveen | - | - | 1% | 11% | 35% | 41% | 11% |
11 | WANG Rory | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 41% | 39% |
12 | CHO Jadon Yushin | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 39% | 50% |
13 | MAO Lucas | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 38% | 54% |
14 | HART-SYED declan | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 35% | 15% | 2% |
15 | HOU Gaven | - | 4% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
16 | JURMAN Therin | - | 2% | 17% | 40% | 35% | 6% | |
17 | LEE Eugene | - | - | - | 4% | 19% | 44% | 34% |
18 | SIMONOV Timofey | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 41% | 43% |
19 | ZHEN Ethan | - | - | 2% | 14% | 47% | 37% | |
20 | HOLLIS Sean | - | - | 1% | 8% | 32% | 48% | 10% |
21 | CHEN Ethan | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 40% | 46% |
22 | FENG Michael | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 40% | 47% |
23 | JIANG Bowang | - | - | 1% | 7% | 29% | 46% | 17% |
24 | MARTIRE Luca | - | 2% | 19% | 41% | 30% | 7% | 1% |
25 | TANG Alexander L. | - | - | 2% | 17% | 49% | 32% | |
26 | BOURGUIGNAT James | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 37% | 12% | |
27 | JIN Andy | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 2% |
28 | TOOMRE Kai | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 4% |
29 | CAO Joshua | 15% | 35% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
30 | HOLMES Alexiy | 1% | 6% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
31 | TARCHICHI Robby | - | 5% | 25% | 42% | 24% | 3% | |
32 | BELCHAMBER Mason | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 38% | 26% | 5% |
33 | LEE Charles T | - | - | 4% | 19% | 43% | 34% | |
34 | GRIFFITH MCALLISTER Thomas | - | - | - | 1% | 13% | 42% | 44% |
35 | BAI Brian | - | - | - | 4% | 23% | 53% | 20% |
36 | PECK Quinn | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 36% | 16% | 2% |
37 | WONG Jacob W. | - | 2% | 15% | 34% | 34% | 13% | 2% |
38 | SHANNON Jack | - | - | 4% | 18% | 37% | 32% | 8% |
39 | XU Nathan | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 36% | 14% | 1% |
40 | LEONG Samuel | 1% | 10% | 29% | 37% | 19% | 3% | - |
41 | HU Daniel | 8% | 31% | 38% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
42 | YEVDAYEV Tamir Yevdayev | 1% | 8% | 25% | 34% | 23% | 7% | 1% |
43 | ZHANG GAVIN J | - | 1% | 10% | 28% | 38% | 20% | 3% |
44 | ABRAMKIN Tim | - | 2% | 16% | 37% | 33% | 11% | 1% |
45 | WANG Luke | 10% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | |
46 | ONIK Ari N. | 1% | 6% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 4% | - |
47 | CHA James | - | 1% | 10% | 33% | 39% | 15% | 2% |
48 | SICAT Justin | - | 4% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 7% | 1% |
49 | HUANG Chenghan | 1% | 9% | 27% | 37% | 21% | 5% | - |
50 | MARISI Gabriel | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 36% | 32% | 8% |
51 | GAO Andrew | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
52 | POWELL Sean | - | 4% | 19% | 37% | 31% | 8% | - |
53 | CAO Justin | - | 3% | 16% | 37% | 33% | 10% | 1% |
54 | NABASSOUA Djibril | 1% | 9% | 25% | 35% | 23% | 7% | 1% |
55 | GATES Combustion | 7% | 28% | 37% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - |
56 | YANG David H. | 9% | 30% | 37% | 19% | 4% | - | |
57 | WOODCOCK Henry | 1% | 22% | 43% | 27% | 6% | - | |
58 | BAI Austin | 1% | 11% | 35% | 40% | 12% | 1% | |
59 | SUN Henry | 1% | 6% | 21% | 34% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
60 | DIAZ Gabriel | 2% | 24% | 42% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - |
61 | CHEN kenneth | 1% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 17% | 3% | - |
62 | GREENE Amit | 1% | 9% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 3% | - |
63 | JABLOKOV Roman | 15% | 38% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
64 | LIANG Haojia | 10% | 33% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
65 | XU Brian | 1% | 13% | 35% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - |
66 | CHUN Zachary | 40% | 43% | 15% | 2% | - | - | |
67 | BRILLANTES Luke | 3% | 29% | 43% | 21% | 4% | - | |
68 | GECKELER James | 1% | 8% | 37% | 38% | 14% | 2% | - |
69 | KIM Maxwell | 4% | 20% | 37% | 28% | 10% | 1% | - |
70 | CHOU-ESTEBAN Pau | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
71 | CHANG Parker | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 42% | 20% | 2% |
72 | DHANOA Kian | 5% | 23% | 38% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
73 | YOUM Tyson | 25% | 42% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
74 | ZHANG Hanru | - | 3% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 10% | 1% |
75 | LIU Ryan | 12% | 34% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
76 | KUO Phineas | 1% | 9% | 32% | 38% | 18% | 3% | - |
77 | ZHANG Julian | 4% | 23% | 39% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - |
78 | GROSPERRIN Eugene | 6% | 29% | 42% | 20% | 3% | - | |
79 | MIRCHANDANI Aditya | 3% | 16% | 35% | 33% | 13% | 2% | |
80 | MOON Nicolas | 80% | 19% | 1% | - | - | - | |
81 | GRUNENWALD Henri | 3% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
82 | JIANG Bohan | 7% | 32% | 38% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
83 | CHINN Callum | 3% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - |
84 | POLEPALLI Vinil | 2% | 25% | 42% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
85 | POLLIO Benjamin | 10% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
86 | BAS Jonathan | 7% | 29% | 38% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
87 | WALDROOP Cuin | 47% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
88 | ZHANG Ethan | 20% | 49% | 25% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
89 | BARBANEL Joseph | 8% | 30% | 37% | 20% | 5% | - | - |
89 | GONZALEZ DE COSIO ALVAREZ Iker | 36% | 42% | 18% | 3% | - | - | - |
91 | LEVIN Jack | 15% | 47% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
92 | CHUN Alexander | 52% | 41% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
93 | DA SILVA Jamie | 12% | 39% | 36% | 12% | 1% | - | |
94 | ZHENG Austin | 13% | 41% | 34% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
94 | NAM Justin | 27% | 55% | 17% | 2% | - | - | - |
96 | DAO-CRESPO Joaquin | 14% | 36% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | |
97 | COUAILLIER Leo | 32% | 43% | 21% | 5% | - | - | - |
98 | RAMESH Prashvin | 34% | 42% | 19% | 4% | - | - | - |
99 | SHAW eric | 28% | 41% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
99 | LEE Aeden | 47% | 41% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
99 | RAFTOPOULOS Alexios | 54% | 37% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
99 | ROSE Jack | 81% | 17% | 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.