Boston Fencing Club - 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 | 6 | ||
1 | TRAN Spencer | - | - | - | - | 2% | 20% | 78% |
2 | AHMED Mohsen | - | - | - | - | 2% | 20% | 78% |
3 | MANSFIELD Hunter | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 34% | 11% | |
3 | KABA Elias | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 40% | 45% |
5 | MORI Seneca | - | 2% | 10% | 30% | 40% | 18% | |
6 | PARIGIAN Alexander | - | - | 4% | 19% | 41% | 32% | 3% |
7 | TSIEN Richard | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 34% | 12% | |
8 | SZCZAPA Lukas | - | - | 4% | 20% | 44% | 33% | |
9 | WANG-SONG Evan | - | - | 1% | 7% | 33% | 60% | |
10 | CAFASSO Alexander | - | 1% | 5% | 21% | 42% | 32% | |
11 | MANUEL Eli | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 34% | 11% | |
12 | HE Bronto | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 24% | |
13 | ZHENG Jason | 1% | 8% | 25% | 37% | 25% | 5% | |
14 | CHO Adrian | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 15% | 1% |
15 | MOZZER Nolan | - | 1% | 6% | 21% | 36% | 29% | 7% |
16 | FOGEL Jake | 2% | 13% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 3% | |
17 | CHEN Tianjun | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 42% | 27% | |
18 | CHEN Jayden A | 2% | 14% | 33% | 33% | 15% | 2% | |
19 | ZHANG Jonathan | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 24% | |
20 | CHEN Evan | - | 2% | 15% | 37% | 36% | 10% | |
21 | LAI Jayden | 3% | 15% | 31% | 31% | 16% | 3% | - |
22 | GAO Ryan | 3% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 10% | 1% | |
23 | LAU LUCAS | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 36% | 16% | |
24 | SMITH Theo | 3% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 12% | 2% | |
25 | CAVALLARO Sebastian | 12% | 34% | 34% | 16% | 3% | - | |
26 | CHAVES Evan | 1% | 6% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 8% | |
27 | HEMPHILL Kurt | 1% | 6% | 25% | 38% | 25% | 6% | |
28 | LEE Harrison | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 32% | 11% | |
29 | KESELMAN Ron | 11% | 36% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
30 | CHEN Daniel | 1% | 6% | 25% | 40% | 25% | 3% | |
31 | TANG Luke | 1% | 10% | 32% | 37% | 17% | 3% | |
32 | ROBINSON Blake | 27% | 42% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | |
33 | CHAN Tyler | - | 6% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 7% | |
34 | ZINCHUK Yuri | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | - |
35 | CHALLAMEL Hadrien | 2% | 11% | 28% | 33% | 20% | 5% | - |
36 | ROBINSON Garrett | 1% | 8% | 28% | 37% | 22% | 5% | |
37 | CIANCHETTA David | 13% | 36% | 34% | 14% | 3% | - | |
38 | QI Bryan | 14% | 39% | 35% | 11% | 2% | - | |
39 | DIXON Miles | - | 2% | 12% | 29% | 36% | 19% | 2% |
40 | YU George | 21% | 39% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
41 | HAN Nathan | 7% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
42 | GILLARD Adan | 2% | 11% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 4% | - |
43 | MANN Daniel | - | 2% | 13% | 37% | 37% | 11% | |
44 | FAUCHER James | 1% | 11% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 4% | |
45 | SHI Evan | 12% | 37% | 36% | 13% | 2% | - | |
46 | LANE Sawyer | 26% | 44% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | |
47 | BENNETT Nathaniel | 4% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% | |
48 | CHEN Hayden | 26% | 42% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - | |
49 | LAZORISAK Andrew | 1% | 11% | 31% | 38% | 18% | 2% | |
50 | CHIANG William | 5% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 8% | 1% | |
51 | GU Eric | 1% | 7% | 25% | 37% | 25% | 6% | |
52 | ROFINO Samuel | 7% | 27% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
53 | BRESLAV Asher | 1% | 11% | 31% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - |
54 | DAI Jason | 4% | 26% | 39% | 24% | 7% | 1% | |
55 | DING Charlie | 13% | 34% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - | |
56 | MALLAKIS Efstathios | 13% | 38% | 34% | 13% | 2% | - | |
57 | SCHLUBACH Jasper | 11% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - | |
57 | LEE Ryan | 28% | 43% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - | |
59 | CHEN Cameron | 3% | 15% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 3% | - |
60 | WILLIAMS Gavin | 10% | 30% | 34% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
61 | HOLBROOK Silas | 6% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 8% | 1% | |
62 | LANDMAN Martin | 18% | 38% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | |
63 | LI Jayden | 26% | 45% | 24% | 5% | 1% | - | |
64 | MCGANN Grant | 25% | 43% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | |
65 | YOON Jonathan | 3% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 10% | 1% | - |
66 | SONPAL Winslow | 5% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 7% | 1% | |
67 | AKEHURST MOORE Ian | 1% | 7% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 7% | - |
68 | SCOGGIN Charles | 65% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - | |
69 | GREGORY Milo | 30% | 42% | 22% | 5% | 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.