January SJCC

Cadet Men's Saber

Sunday, January 25, 2026 at 8:00 AM

Renasant Convention Center - Memphis, TN, 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 ZHAO Royce - 5% 20% 36% 30% 9%
2 HOLZ Lucas - - 4% 19% 42% 35%
3 CAO Donald - 1% 4% 17% 35% 33% 11%
3 WONG Lucas - - 2% 10% 29% 40% 19%
5 HENDERSON Lucas - - 2% 12% 32% 38% 16%
6 GONG Alex - 2% 11% 27% 34% 21% 4%
7 MINASIAN Mason 4% 19% 35% 30% 11% 2%
8 CHAMBERS Miles - - 2% 9% 28% 40% 21%
9 KANG Matthew - - 3% 16% 35% 34% 11%
10 PARK Inwoo 2% 14% 30% 32% 17% 4% -
11 YANG Phillip - 1% 5% 17% 34% 32% 12%
12 GUREWICH Benjamin - 2% 12% 31% 35% 17% 3%
13 LUAN Mark 3% 19% 36% 30% 10% 1%
14 OH Aster - 3% 16% 35% 33% 12%
15 FAN Hsiao-Kai(Kai) - 7% 25% 36% 24% 7% 1%
16 IYER Neil - 4% 17% 33% 31% 13% 2%
17 SUN Andrew - 1% 8% 25% 36% 24% 5%
18 GREMILLION Obadiah - 1% 7% 25% 42% 26%
19 CLARK Aram - 5% 19% 36% 30% 10%
20 KOVALEV Daniil N. - - 1% 6% 22% 42% 29%
21 BIVIJI Ali - - 4% 16% 34% 34% 11%
22 KHOTLINE Daniel - 6% 24% 36% 25% 8% 1%
23 WANG Max 1% 5% 17% 31% 30% 14% 2%
24 WANG Justin - - 2% 11% 33% 39% 15%
25 KITSON Chase - 1% 8% 23% 35% 25% 7%
26 LI Coby 7% 27% 37% 22% 6% 1%
27 KANG Jeremy 1% 13% 34% 36% 14% 2%
28 PEREIRA Beckham - 2% 12% 30% 34% 18% 3%
29 LI Ayden - 3% 15% 34% 34% 13%
30 DAI Zihou 1% 7% 25% 37% 25% 5%
31 WANG Theodore 2% 14% 31% 33% 16% 4% -
32 RAJMOHAN Arya 5% 22% 34% 26% 11% 2% -
33 WANG ANDREW CHANG - - 1% 5% 21% 41% 32%
34 ZHANG Kaixuan - 4% 18% 35% 32% 11%
35 NGO Maximus - - 1% 6% 25% 43% 25%
36 CIEMINS Henry - 1% 8% 26% 36% 23% 6%
37 YOOK Isaac - - 4% 19% 39% 30% 8%
38 LEE Brian - 2% 13% 34% 38% 13%
39 LI Michael 18% 38% 31% 11% 2% -
40 LIU Marvin 2% 14% 36% 34% 12% 1%
41 IM Tyler - 3% 15% 35% 35% 12%
42 LIU Ethan 2% 11% 29% 34% 19% 5% -
43 TANI Tino - - 3% 15% 33% 35% 14%
44 ZHANG Shaoxuan 2% 13% 31% 34% 17% 3%
45 LI Alex Y. - 4% 16% 32% 31% 14% 2%
46 ZHAO Chen Fei - - 2% 9% 26% 39% 24%
47 KOZLOFF Wyatt 1% 11% 28% 33% 20% 6% 1%
48 AGARWAAL Yohan - 3% 15% 31% 31% 16% 3%
49 SO Preston - - 1% 6% 24% 42% 27%
50 KIM Kendrick - - 3% 17% 43% 38%
51 LEE Brady - 1% 9% 26% 36% 22% 5%
52 LUCAS William - 1% 9% 26% 36% 23% 6%
53 BOLLU Viren 1% 9% 26% 36% 23% 5%
53 SONG Aidan 1% 13% 33% 34% 16% 3% -
53 GATTO Enzo P. 12% 33% 34% 17% 4% - -
56 WEI Lucas 16% 38% 31% 12% 2% -
57 SUN Eon 13% 34% 34% 15% 3% - -
58 BRIMMER Robert (Trey) - 2% 11% 27% 34% 21% 4%
59 LAMTAN Christoffer 4% 18% 32% 29% 14% 3% -
60 KANIA Alexander 7% 27% 37% 22% 6% 1%
61 LIU Jayden 2% 18% 39% 31% 10% 1% -
62 MEDVINSKY Daniel 3% 17% 32% 30% 14% 3% -
63 LIU Ryan 3% 19% 34% 28% 12% 3% -
64 ROH Jaden - 8% 29% 38% 20% 4% -
65 CHANG Ethan 8% 30% 36% 20% 5% 1%
66 KARAVAS Nicholas - 5% 18% 32% 29% 13% 2%
67 AN Chris 5% 31% 40% 20% 4% - -
68 TASIKAS Peter 1% 11% 29% 35% 19% 5% -
69 NAMBIAR Navin 5% 22% 36% 26% 9% 1% -
71 BROOKS Drake 13% 35% 34% 15% 3% - -
71 VO Landon 3% 17% 32% 30% 14% 3% -
73 ROBINSON Ezra 27% 41% 24% 7% 1% - -
74 MBERIA Alexander 11% 37% 35% 14% 2% -
75 WONG Ron 9% 32% 36% 18% 4% -
76 WANG Alex 1% 11% 29% 36% 19% 3%
77 LIU Aaron 2% 12% 31% 36% 17% 3%
78 NAFTALI Ori 28% 42% 23% 6% 1% -
79 VO Blake 3% 16% 31% 30% 16% 4% -
81 JOUFFLINEAU Yohann 3% 23% 39% 26% 8% 1% -
82 CHEN Shawn 12% 31% 33% 18% 5% 1% -
83 ZHU Matthew 4% 19% 34% 29% 12% 2% -
84 BIVIJI Adam 12% 33% 34% 16% 4% - -
84 LEE Damian 7% 27% 36% 23% 7% 1% -
86 LIU Guanyu 5% 22% 35% 26% 9% 2% -
87 PANIWALA Atif 69% 27% 4% - - - -
88 YU Ronen 46% 41% 12% 2% - - -
89 BRUM Charles E. 28% 42% 23% 6% 1% -
90 SUN Ryan 17% 38% 31% 12% 2% -
91 SMITH Etienne 42% 40% 15% 3% - - -
92 D'AMELJ Edoardo 15% 34% 32% 15% 4% - -
93 VINTFELD Liam 41% 42% 14% 2% - -
94 KULKARNI Shreyas 15% 43% 31% 10% 2% - -
95 NAZIF Laith 67% 29% 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.