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 | BORATGIS Christopher J. | - | - | - | 2% | 21% | 77% | |
| 2 | GOVOROV Alexander | 1% | 8% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 7% | 1% |
| 3 | HELMY Richard | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 38% | 19% |
| 3 | ERIKSEN Casey | - | 3% | 12% | 28% | 33% | 19% | 4% |
| 5 | THOMAS Andrew | 1% | 6% | 21% | 33% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 6 | KUSACTAY Eric | 1% | 6% | 19% | 31% | 28% | 13% | 2% |
| 7 | SUH Aiden | - | 3% | 12% | 28% | 33% | 20% | 5% |
| 8 | CHO Adrian | 5% | 20% | 33% | 27% | 12% | 3% | - |
| 9 | YANG Alex | - | 1% | 6% | 19% | 34% | 30% | 11% |
| 10 | HANNA Alexander | 10% | 30% | 34% | 19% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 11 | STEVENS Owen | 3% | 13% | 28% | 31% | 19% | 6% | 1% |
| 12 | ALABI Azryl | - | 1% | 6% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 8% |
| 13 | LAU LUCAS | - | 2% | 12% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 4% |
| 14 | LYCHKO Maksym | - | 3% | 12% | 27% | 33% | 20% | 5% |
| 15 | MANSFIELD Hunter | 1% | 7% | 20% | 31% | 27% | 12% | 2% |
| 16 | SZCZAPA Lukas | - | 4% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 12% | 2% |
| 17 | NG Nico | - | 1% | 6% | 19% | 34% | 30% | 10% |
| 18 | NABAVI Matthew R. | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 40% | 44% |
| 19 | CHEN Tianjun | 6% | 25% | 37% | 25% | 7% | - | |
| 20 | KAPLAN Maddox | - | 2% | 11% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 5% |
| 21 | ZHAI Junqi | - | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 38% | 19% |
| 22 | ZHENG Jason | 1% | 8% | 22% | 33% | 25% | 10% | 1% |
| 23 | EVANS Joseph | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 35% | 20% | 4% |
| 24 | WARD Kofi | 1% | 6% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
| 25 | FRIEDMAN Andres | 3% | 15% | 30% | 31% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 26 | ASHLEY Logan | - | 5% | 17% | 32% | 30% | 14% | 2% |
| 27 | LEE Elijah | 4% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 28 | EMMERT JP | - | 1% | 4% | 16% | 32% | 33% | 14% |
| 29 | KOGAN Yelisey L. | 7% | 26% | 37% | 24% | 6% | - | |
| 30 | BHANDARE Veer | 2% | 11% | 27% | 33% | 21% | 7% | 1% |
| 31 | LEE Kalvin | 4% | 19% | 32% | 28% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 32 | LEE Kevin | 4% | 17% | 31% | 29% | 15% | 4% | - |
| 33 | CHAN Kyle Si Tin | 4% | 18% | 35% | 31% | 11% | 1% | |
| 34 | REELS Eric J. | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 35% | 25% | 7% |
| 35 | ZHANG Jonathan | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 2% |
| 35 | GAO Ryan | 6% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 37 | CARPENTER Touma S. | - | 1% | 5% | 17% | 33% | 32% | 13% |
| 38 | VAN DOREN William | 1% | 9% | 26% | 34% | 23% | 7% | 1% |
| 39 | OTTAVIANO Aaron | - | 4% | 16% | 31% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
| 40 | WANG Charles | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 5% |
| 41 | KIM Zac | 1% | 8% | 22% | 31% | 25% | 11% | 2% |
| 41 | GAO "George" Xiaojiang | - | 2% | 10% | 24% | 33% | 24% | 7% |
| 43 | SUBRAMANIAM Sahil | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 11% |
| 44 | FOGEL Jake | 3% | 17% | 33% | 30% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 46 | ROBINSON Blake | 42% | 40% | 15% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 47 | CHAU Collin | 6% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 8% | - | |
| 48 | YU Kenneth | 11% | 31% | 33% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 49 | MANTINAOS Constantinos | 13% | 35% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 50 | ANDERSON Connor | 17% | 37% | 31% | 13% | 3% | - | - |
| 51 | WANG Marcus | 8% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 52 | KIRSCH Adam J. | - | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 2% |
| 52 | ANDERSON Eric | 5% | 19% | 32% | 28% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 52 | LIU George | 2% | 15% | 34% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 55 | FRIZZELL Kai | 6% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 56 | WARD Carrington R. | - | 2% | 11% | 26% | 34% | 21% | 5% |
| 57 | JIANG Aidan | 46% | 39% | 13% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 58 | YU David | 4% | 17% | 32% | 30% | 15% | 4% | - |
| 59 | AGUIRRE Pablo | 11% | 30% | 34% | 19% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 60 | HEISLER Maxfield | 3% | 15% | 31% | 31% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 61 | SHAPIRO Samuel | 25% | 41% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 62 | LAW Oliver | 8% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 63 | DINIO Clara J. | 8% | 28% | 37% | 22% | 5% | - | |
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.