Cobra Challenge SYC/RCC/Y8

Y-12 Men's Foil

Sunday, November 25, 2018 at 8:00 AM

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 DESERANNO Jeidus - - - - 6% 33% 61%
2 PELOSKY Zack B. - - 3% 14% 32% 35% 15%
3 FUKUDA Renzo K. - 5% 16% 30% 30% 15% 3%
3 LI Richard - - - 5% 23% 43% 28%
5 JEON Caleb A. - - 3% 16% 36% 34% 10%
6 MARX Oscar L. - - - 1% 11% 38% 50%
7 DOCTOR Aidan L. - - - 2% 12% 39% 47%
8 LEE Joshua - - 5% 22% 42% 28% 2%
9 SCHEMBRI MCCORD Kruz T. - - - - 3% 29% 68%
10 KAO Castor T. - - - 2% 13% 39% 46%
10 HOOSHI Jayden C. - - - 4% 19% 42% 35%
12 LIANG Lixi (Henry) - - - 3% 17% 42% 38%
13 NG Eben S. - - 2% 11% 30% 38% 18%
14 GORBACHEV Alexander - - 6% 22% 37% 27% 7%
14 ANTON Nathaniel - 2% 12% 30% 34% 18% 3%
16 PAE Jonathan L. - - - 4% 20% 42% 33%
17 KIM Tei D. - - - 1% 8% 35% 55%
18 ZHANG Nicholas Z. - - - - 2% 19% 79%
19 ZHANG Yun Isaac - - 2% 12% 33% 38% 15%
20 KEE Andrew L. - 1% 9% 35% 42% 14%
21 BING Charles - 4% 15% 30% 32% 17% 3%
22 GRAHAM Roy J. - - - 5% 32% 63%
23 PAE Brian L. - 1% 5% 21% 38% 30% 6%
24 DOUGLAS Oscar M. - 3% 17% 36% 32% 12% 1%
25 CHEN Charlie Tian-You - - 3% 15% 36% 37% 8%
26 ROBSON Samuel - 1% 12% 38% 41% 8%
27 LI Owen - - 4% 23% 45% 28%
28 WONG Adrian - - - - 2% 19% 80%
29 YANG Luao - 1% 5% 18% 35% 31% 10%
30 PO Oliver - 4% 20% 38% 30% 8% -
31 CATINO Brennen 1% 8% 25% 33% 24% 8% 1%
32 XU Jia Bao - - 3% 14% 35% 37% 12%
33 BANERJEE Anup - - 1% 6% 22% 42% 30%
34 LEE Aidan - - 4% 16% 33% 34% 13%
35 YU Jason - 3% 17% 35% 32% 12% 2%
36 MARX Jackson L. - - 1% 9% 32% 47% 11%
37 RUSADZE Nickolas - - 3% 14% 32% 35% 15%
38 GONG Benjamin - - 3% 16% 39% 34% 8%
39 GOOR Julian - 4% 20% 36% 29% 10% 1%
40 ORVANANOS Jorge - 1% 7% 24% 38% 25% 6%
41 BRUK Peter J. - - 2% 11% 31% 39% 17%
42 CHENG Jonathan - - - 1% 10% 46% 44%
43 BASOK Nikita - - 5% 30% 44% 20% 1%
44 AHN Jun - 4% 18% 32% 30% 14% 3%
45 GU Andrew 1% 8% 28% 38% 21% 4% -
46 GEOGHEGAN Ronan - 3% 17% 36% 33% 10% 1%
47 YAN Edward Tianshuo 5% 25% 37% 25% 8% 1% -
48 AUGUSTINE Aaron A. 1% 10% 33% 40% 14% 2% -
49 ZHANG Evan - 3% 14% 31% 33% 16% 2%
50 TSIMIKLIS Yanni 2% 16% 34% 31% 13% 2% -
51 MENG Zhaoyi - 3% 16% 38% 34% 8% -
52 LI Arvin 2% 16% 34% 31% 14% 3% -
53 LI Eric - - 5% 21% 41% 31% 3%
54 MIALL Steven A. - 3% 14% 31% 34% 16% 2%
55 TANG Owen S. 2% 14% 31% 33% 16% 4% -
56 KNOEPFFLER Alex - - 3% 24% 43% 26% 4%
57 BAS Liam - - 4% 16% 33% 33% 13%
58 LE Jacob W. 13% 35% 33% 15% 3% - -
59 GUO Sean 1% 8% 24% 35% 24% 7% 1%
60 WU Alexander - 3% 15% 34% 33% 13% 1%
61 JIANG Owen - - 4% 19% 42% 30% 5%
62 ZHEN Ethan - 1% 7% 22% 36% 27% 7%
63 GAO Anthony 1% 11% 29% 34% 19% 5% -
64 TAHOUN Mostafa - 7% 26% 38% 24% 5% -
65 BAO Aaron 2% 13% 29% 32% 18% 5% -
66 CULLIVAN Justice 1% 8% 27% 38% 22% 4% -
67 ACHILOV Sayid 1% 11% 33% 36% 17% 3% -
68 OUYANG Matt J. 1% 13% 36% 35% 13% 2% -
69 KALIPERSAD Neil A. 14% 41% 35% 9% 1% -
70 HONG Issac 2% 12% 29% 34% 19% 4% -
71 XU Andy P. 1% 7% 22% 33% 26% 10% 2%
72 LIN Michael - 1% 5% 20% 37% 30% 8%
73 TOLBA Abdelrahman - 1% 7% 24% 38% 24% 5%
74 LI Yao (Liam) 1% 9% 28% 37% 21% 4% -
75 CANO Marcos E. - 3% 14% 28% 31% 19% 5%
77 DONG Quintin - 1% 8% 29% 39% 20% 3%
78 BOYLAN Kevin 4% 18% 33% 29% 13% 3% -
79 LIN James G. - - 4% 23% 42% 27% 4%
80 ZHOU Andrew C. 1% 11% 31% 36% 17% 3% -
81 WANG Jackson 2% 11% 28% 33% 20% 6% -
81 LI Jinghua E. 12% 37% 35% 14% 2% - -
83 GAO William 33% 46% 19% 2% - - -
84 NICOLL William 1% 6% 22% 35% 26% 9% 1%
84 SOLDATOV Faddey 9% 35% 36% 16% 3% - -
86 GUO Justin 1% 22% 40% 27% 8% 1% -
87 LIU Derek - 4% 26% 45% 23% 2%
88 WECHSLER Jacob 44% 42% 12% 1% - -
88 TORRES Treston 9% 43% 39% 8% 1% -
90 WONG Garrick G. - 1% 7% 34% 43% 16%
91 ZHAI Jeffrey 1% 6% 21% 34% 27% 10% 1%
92 LIU Zixian (Aaron) - 2% 12% 32% 37% 16% 2%
93 XU Ethan - 4% 22% 38% 26% 8% 1%
94 WADLEY Brendan E. 1% 10% 30% 36% 19% 4% -
95 BONOMO Sebastian J. 5% 21% 37% 28% 9% 1% -
95 XIE Brandon 1% 12% 33% 36% 16% 3% -
97 WANG Mason 22% 46% 27% 4% - - -
98 NG Jeremiah 3% 21% 40% 28% 7% 1% -
99 XIANG Derrick 2% 16% 35% 31% 14% 3% -
100 BENATER Adam 47% 39% 12% 2% - - -
101 TIKHAEV Alexander 23% 47% 24% 5% 1% - -
101 QIU Daniel 4% 23% 37% 26% 8% 1% -
103 GARCIA Sebastian R. 3% 17% 33% 30% 14% 3% -
104 TANG Albert 3% 20% 41% 29% 7% 1% -
105 LEWIS Akhil - 6% 24% 40% 25% 5% -
106 RADOSLAVOV Ivan-Asen 2% 13% 29% 32% 18% 5% 1%
107 UHRMACHER Idris 23% 48% 24% 5% - - -
108 DECORLETO III Andrew (Tripp) J. 43% 40% 14% 2% - - -
109 ARICO Trey 8% 31% 38% 19% 4% -
110 OTTO Nathaniel B. 4% 25% 39% 24% 7% 1% -
110 LI Aaron 3% 19% 35% 29% 12% 2% -
112 TRUBETSKI David 14% 34% 33% 16% 4% - -
113 FUKUDA Diego 1% 8% 24% 34% 24% 7% 1%
114 SVERDLOV Seth 9% 27% 34% 22% 7% 1% -
114 KLOTZ Isaiah 8% 27% 36% 22% 7% 1% -
116 PITERBARG Maxim 12% 32% 34% 18% 4% 1% -
116 CHIN Ryan 11% 33% 35% 17% 4% - -
118 CHEN Kyle P. - 4% 19% 35% 30% 10% 1%
119 TANG August L. 1% 7% 22% 33% 26% 10% 2%
120 PEDERSEN Charles 20% 41% 29% 9% 1% - -
121 KNIZHNIK David 11% 33% 36% 17% 3% - -
122 SHAO Eric 5% 22% 37% 27% 9% 1% -
123 TRAUGOT Owen G. 6% 24% 37% 24% 8% 1% -
123 LI Matthew 1% 8% 24% 33% 24% 8% 1%
125 BADLANI Dev 20% 44% 29% 6% - - -
126 ZHOU Leon 10% 36% 39% 13% 2% -
127 NICOLL James 23% 40% 27% 8% 1% - -
128 ORLOV Dmitriy 35% 47% 15% 2% - - -
129 LIU Ryan 8% 29% 37% 20% 5% 1% -
130 LIEW Jeremy K. - 7% 29% 38% 21% 5% -
131 LI Ayren 29% 43% 22% 5% - - -
132 KOVACS Wyatt 3% 22% 41% 27% 7% 1% -
133 BOBROW Silas 35% 46% 18% 2% - -
134 CHENG Ethan 1% 8% 24% 35% 25% 7% -
135 ZHUANG Chuanxuan 10% 39% 42% 8% 1% - -
136 SANDHU LERNER Armaan S. 12% 34% 34% 16% 3% - -
137 HUANG Eythan 81% 17% 1% - - - -
137 ZHU Brandan 8% 34% 40% 16% 2% - -
139 BOWER Sam 18% 37% 30% 12% 3% - -
140 SONG Austin 53% 37% 9% 1% - - -
141 MCGREEVY Oliver 16% 36% 31% 13% 3% - -
141 VISHAWADIA Jaimin 18% 37% 30% 12% 2% - -
143 GAO Payton 23% 42% 26% 8% 1% - -
144 ZHANG Zican 15% 41% 32% 11% 2% - -
145 WANG Julang 13% 42% 34% 10% 1% - -

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.