Cobra Challenge SYC/RCC/Y8

Y-14 Men's Saber

Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 3:30 PM

Secaucus, NJ - Secaucus, NJ, 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 DENNER Lysander H. - - 1% 9% 31% 42% 17%
2 DESROSIERS Olivier - 1% 6% 20% 34% 29% 10%
3 LILOV Neil - - - 2% 12% 39% 47%
3 WIND Nicky E. - 1% 8% 24% 36% 25% 6%
5 NG Jonathan H. - 1% 10% 35% 40% 14%
6 LINSKY Matthew - 3% 16% 35% 35% 12%
7 SUBBIAH Prashanth V. - - 3% 13% 32% 36% 16%
8 HAMMERSTROM Jared - 4% 18% 35% 32% 11%
9 SHI Andrew - - 2% 11% 30% 39% 19%
9 SO Hananiah - - 2% 11% 30% 38% 19%
11 KEEFE Duncan - 3% 16% 32% 32% 14% 2%
12 FRISHMAN Ethan J. - - 4% 15% 33% 35% 14%
13 PAN Jerry - - 2% 10% 28% 39% 22%
14 KIM Avery J. - - 5% 24% 44% 26%
15 JEAN Noe T. - 1% 12% 38% 38% 11%
16 BERMAN Luca - - 2% 10% 30% 40% 18%
17 YANG Richard - - 3% 14% 33% 36% 13%
18 PAN Jack (Yuxiang) - - 1% 6% 26% 43% 24%
19 WOLFE-MCGUIRE George T. 1% 6% 21% 34% 27% 10% 1%
20 JI Cody Walter - - 1% 7% 27% 44% 22%
21 GINIS Nathan - - 1% 9% 36% 55%
22 GREENE Alexander J. - - 1% 6% 24% 42% 27%
23 JARAMILLO Tobias L. - - 1% 9% 29% 40% 19%
24 SILBERZWEIG Jordan H. - - - 2% 15% 42% 40%
25 HARGENRADER Kailen A. - 1% 6% 24% 38% 26% 6%
26 DEISBOECK Maximilian S. - 2% 9% 24% 35% 24% 6%
27 CZYZEWSKI Konrad R. - - 5% 24% 40% 25% 5%
28 ALKEMPER Tristan H. - 3% 15% 35% 35% 12%
28 MORRILL Justin - - 5% 24% 44% 25%
30 CHAN Matthew - - - 3% 19% 46% 32%
31 CHAN Alexander S. 1% 7% 22% 34% 26% 9% 1%
32 WILSON Jude - 1% 9% 28% 37% 20% 4%
33 MORRILL William - 1% 8% 29% 44% 19%
34 PAN Andrew W. - 1% 6% 25% 42% 25%
35 ZHOU Kevin - 1% 10% 29% 36% 20% 4%
35 GOLD Jackson 1% 6% 24% 37% 26% 6% 1%
37 TONG Zachary - 6% 23% 37% 26% 8% 1%
38 PETRAMALE Samuel J. - 1% 8% 26% 37% 23% 5%
39 KIM Shaun M. - - 2% 12% 34% 38% 14%
40 FLOT Tai A. - - 4% 20% 41% 30% 4%
41 DA GRACA Aidan - 1% 6% 20% 35% 29% 9%
42 TRUDNOS Allen - - 4% 19% 39% 31% 8%
43 ZHOU Miles - 7% 24% 35% 25% 9% 1%
44 HONG Steven 20% 39% 29% 11% 2% -
45 KUSHKOV Veniamin - 2% 12% 32% 38% 16%
46 HONG Vincent Q. - 9% 33% 41% 15% 2%
47 LIU Kelly - 3% 21% 43% 27% 7% 1%
48 DENNER Maximilian P. - - 2% 11% 29% 39% 19%
49 MAKLIN Edward P. - 2% 12% 30% 34% 18% 3%
50 HUANG Ethan F. - 1% 6% 21% 34% 28% 9%
51 ALTIRS Alexander 5% 21% 35% 27% 10% 2% -
52 SHAN Ethan - 5% 24% 38% 25% 7% 1%
53 WELLS Griffin 2% 17% 39% 30% 10% 1% -
53 HONG Justin - 3% 12% 28% 33% 19% 4%
55 CHON Taylor A. 1% 6% 22% 35% 27% 9% 1%
56 WU Wilmund 10% 32% 36% 18% 4% -
57 LEE Justin - 4% 20% 39% 31% 6%
58 NAZLYMOV Andrei 2% 12% 30% 34% 18% 4%
59 YUAN Kevin - 2% 15% 39% 35% 9%
60 EPSTEIN Oliver D. 4% 20% 38% 30% 9% 1%
61 CHAE Noah - 7% 26% 36% 23% 7% 1%
62 ZHANG Jeffrey 1% 13% 35% 33% 14% 3% -
63 SHOMAN Noah - 2% 16% 34% 32% 14% 2%
65 ZHENG Edward L. 2% 13% 33% 35% 16% 3%
66 SHIRPAL Oleksandr - 3% 14% 32% 34% 15% 2%
67 YUN Jake - - 2% 15% 45% 39%
68 HUANG Alexander C. - - 2% 14% 38% 35% 10%
69 SHERWOOD Hayden F. 24% 43% 26% 7% 1% - -
69 LUKASHENKO Darii - 1% 9% 28% 38% 21% 3%
71 NOBLE Colin - 3% 16% 34% 32% 13% 2%
72 CLYMER Lucas Y. 1% 9% 25% 34% 23% 7% 1%
73 LOWHAM-RUZZO Alexander J. 2% 14% 31% 32% 17% 4% -
74 LEE Aydan J. 12% 32% 33% 17% 5% 1% -
75 KOVACH Jonah F. - - 4% 17% 36% 32% 10%
76 CHANG Yufeng 27% 43% 23% 6% 1% - -
77 WANG Robert 1% 10% 30% 36% 19% 4% -
78 ZHANG Ethan W. 2% 11% 27% 32% 21% 7% 1%
79 SAINT-PIERRE-MENARD Colin 16% 37% 32% 13% 3% - -
80 REN Richard 3% 20% 40% 29% 7% 1% -
81 GILSON Lucas B. 2% 14% 32% 32% 16% 4% -
82 HUANG Tyler T. - 8% 39% 39% 13% 1%
83 CHENG Kyle 1% 14% 39% 34% 10% 1%
84 LU Caleb Q. 4% 23% 39% 26% 7% 1%
85 HUANG Maxwell H. - - 5% 21% 44% 30%
86 SHTEYN Mark 1% 7% 27% 41% 22% 3%
87 SHOMAN Zachary - 4% 19% 37% 31% 9%
88 GRASS James D. 6% 30% 41% 19% 3% -
88 TONG Luke 10% 32% 37% 17% 3% -
90 EDELMAN Seth A. 3% 21% 39% 28% 8% 1%
91 DENG Andrew - 1% 7% 23% 36% 26% 7%
92 MALONE Gregory D. - 2% 12% 33% 37% 16% 2%
93 CHIN Matthew W. 3% 18% 35% 30% 11% 2% -
94 BUCHMANN Finn D. - - 1% 7% 23% 41% 28%
94 COLE Alexander 4% 19% 35% 29% 11% 2% -
96 HO Kaden M. 2% 14% 30% 32% 17% 4% -
97 RAUSCHER Ryan 1% 8% 24% 34% 24% 8% 1%
98 SKINNER Graham B. - 1% 8% 26% 38% 22% 4%
100 SIMAK Joseph P. 1% 7% 25% 37% 24% 6% 1%
100 OH Triton 4% 24% 38% 25% 8% 1% -
102 PARKER Benjamin D. 31% 45% 21% 3% - - -
103 KIM Matthew 2% 12% 30% 34% 19% 4% -
104 LUTHRA Arjun - 1% 6% 20% 36% 29% 8%
105 GOLDMAN Noah R. 6% 23% 34% 25% 9% 2% -
106 LIN Stephen 1% 12% 38% 35% 13% 2% -
107 REN James 2% 27% 44% 22% 4% - -
108 JOSEF Asher 4% 21% 36% 28% 10% 1% -
109 ZHU Shao 8% 26% 35% 23% 7% 1%
110 BLECKNER Noah 9% 40% 36% 12% 2% -
111 LEE Derek J. 6% 25% 38% 24% 7% 1%
112 SANDERS Samuel B. 17% 49% 28% 6% 1% -
113 MCCARTHY Gabriel 9% 30% 36% 20% 5% -
114 YU Thomas 62% 32% 5% - - -
115 LEUNG Andrew K. 2% 14% 31% 32% 16% 4% -
116 BROWN Aidan S. 11% 31% 34% 18% 5% 1% -
117 HAN Daniel Y. 28% 46% 22% 4% - - -
118 SULLIVAN Aidan J. 4% 21% 36% 28% 10% 1% -
119 WU Richard 60% 34% 6% - - - -
120 ROBERTS Justin C. 7% 27% 37% 23% 6% 1% -
121 FIELDS Matthew S. 1% 8% 25% 35% 23% 7% 1%
122 RUIGOMEZ Eduardo 3% 21% 42% 26% 7% 1% -
123 KESSLER Josh 18% 37% 31% 12% 2% - -
124 CADAMBI Roshan 10% 36% 38% 15% 1% -
125 MELIS Gabriele Nathan 13% 51% 30% 5% - -
126 ZENG Noah 13% 34% 34% 16% 3% - -
127 GEORGE Daniel 62% 33% 5% - - -
128 LEUNG Ronald 7% 26% 35% 23% 8% 1% -
129 PENG Bryan 5% 30% 39% 20% 5% 1% -
130 LIN Steve 5% 22% 35% 26% 10% 2% -
131 ZHANG Derek 10% 30% 35% 20% 6% 1% -
132 MOULTON Ian 2% 14% 32% 32% 16% 4% -
134 LUCAS Hayden 1% 10% 37% 37% 14% 2% -
135 GREENBAUM Max B. 55% 39% 6% - - - -
136 CHIEN Winston L. 10% 44% 35% 10% 1% - -
137 BREKHMAN Eric 18% 41% 32% 9% 1% -
138 ZHUANG Rayken 16% 45% 30% 8% 1% - -
138 SHIPITSIN Yaroslav 81% 18% 1% - - - -
140 BELZ Filip 14% 36% 34% 13% 2% -
140 POU Alan 22% 42% 28% 8% 1% -
142 CHEN Ethan 49% 37% 11% 2% - - -
143 GUREVICH Savely 40% 42% 15% 2% - - -
144 YOUNG Sebastian G. 7% 26% 38% 23% 5% - -
144 BELLUCCI Nicholas 12% 36% 36% 13% 2% - -
144 YURT Vehbi 14% 34% 32% 15% 4% - -
147 YAO Andy 21% 52% 23% 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.