Capitol Clash SYC, RCC, Veteran ROC & Y8

Cadet Men's Foil

Monday, January 20, 2020 at 8:00 AM

National Harbor, MD - National Harbor, MD, USA

Probability density of pool victories

Reset

Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool 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 STANLEY Mason B. 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 88% 49%
2 SINGH Dayaal 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 75% 31%
3 SONG Aiden S. 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 71% 26%
3 ZHANG Nicholas Z. 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 56%
5 YANG Luao 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 76% 34%
6 HONDA Kazu Z. 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 72% 27%
7 SHA Yi Peng 100% 100% 98% 87% 59% 25% 5%
8 WU Jerry 100% 100% 100% 96% 79% 43% 10%
9 WALTER Evran M. 100% 100% 99% 94% 77% 43% 12%
10 MARX Oscar L. 100% 100% 100% 99% 90% 59% 18%
11 GRISWOLD Abel B. 100% 100% 100% 99% 94% 71% 28%
12 YU Anders 100% 100% 100% 98% 86% 55% 17%
13 CHIN Julian S. 100% 100% 100% 100% 94% 69% 24%
14 FORTUNE Alexander J. 100% 100% 93% 61% 23% 4% -
15 LEE Aidan 100% 100% 99% 92% 68% 31% 6%
16 FREEDMAN Samuel E. 100% 100% 99% 95% 77% 43% 11%
17 ROUNTREE Rob 100% 100% 100% 94% 72% 34% 7%
18 LI Richard 100% 100% 100% 99% 89% 52%
19 MCCORD Clark 100% 100% 100% 98% 87% 56% 18%
19 GISLER Benjamin B. 100% 100% 98% 88% 59% 21% 2%
21 ZHANG Yun Isaac 100% 100% 100% 96% 80% 46% 12%
22 KWON Ethan 100% 100% 100% 98% 88% 58% 18%
23 CHAN Tyler 100% 100% 99% 93% 73% 39% 9%
24 JIANG Owen 100% 100% 99% 92% 65% 25% 4%
25 DU Samuel R. 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 67% 26%
26 SONG Leonardo T. 100% 100% 100% 95% 78% 41% 9%
26 SHIN Joshua J. 100% 100% 100% 95% 75% 38% 8%
28 RINEHART Conner M. 100% 100% 98% 86% 55% 20% 3%
29 CULLIVAN Justice 100% 99% 93% 71% 37% 11% 1%
30 BING Charles 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 64% 21%
31 FU Samuel Y. 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 66% 24%
32 DOCTOR Aidan L. 100% 100% 100% 95% 73% 32% 6%
33 LIU Eric Y. 100% 100% 99% 92% 63% 22% 3%
34 WU Alexander 100% 100% 100% 94% 70% 30% 5%
35 KNOEPFFLER Alex 100% 100% 100% 95% 73% 35% 7%
36 DAI Jonathan T. 100% 100% 100% 97% 78% 37% 6%
37 ORVANANOS Jorge 100% 100% 100% 96% 78% 40% 9%
38 ANTON Nathaniel 100% 100% 94% 72% 33% 5%
39 DOUGLAS Oscar M. 100% 100% 99% 94% 72% 35% 7%
40 FOGELSON Frederick J. 100% 100% 100% 99% 91% 63% 20%
40 TSAY Jeremy M. 100% 100% 100% 96% 73% 30% 4%
42 CATINO Brennen 100% 100% 94% 73% 37% 10% 1%
43 BRUK Peter J. 100% 100% 100% 97% 80% 42% 9%
43 ALLAMPALLAM Maanav V. 100% 100% 97% 82% 46% 14% 2%
45 MOHAMED Murad 100% 100% 100% 96% 78% 42% 10%
46 CANO Diego A. 100% 98% 86% 55% 21% 4% -
47 TIAN Aaron C. 100% 100% 99% 93% 73% 38% 9%
47 BOOTSMA Shane-Anson 100% 100% 92% 64% 27% 6% -
47 EMENHEISER Conrad 100% 100% 94% 72% 37% 10% 1%
50 SZEGO Bence P. 100% 100% 94% 70% 32% 7% 1%
51 BAE Kevin 100% 100% 100% 96% 81% 47% 13%
52 KOBAL Maximilian 100% 100% 98% 88% 61% 26% 4%
53 PAE Brian L. 100% 100% 96% 76% 40% 12% 1%
54 KEE Andrew L. 100% 100% 97% 80% 43% 12% 1%
55 GORBACHEV Alexander 100% 100% 100% 95% 75% 37% 7%
55 OH SEAN 100% 100% 100% 97% 82% 48% 13%
57 SICHITIU Alexander 100% 100% 99% 89% 54% 16% 1%
58 DEGROOT Blake 100% 98% 80% 44% 14% 2% -
59 GUO Jacob 100% 97% 81% 49% 19% 4% -
60 CHENG Nathan 100% 98% 81% 39% 9% 1% -
61 GOOR Julian 100% 100% 100% 98% 84% 50% 14%
62 GAO William 100% 98% 78% 38% 9% 1% -
63 WILLIAMS Connor J. 100% 96% 74% 36% 10% 1% -
64 LONG Connor M. 100% 98% 76% 37% 10% 1% -
65 ZHANG Andy W. 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 79% 37%
66 PAE Jonathan L. 100% 100% 100% 97% 82% 49% 13%
67 BUERGIN Aidan 100% 99% 89% 58% 20% 2%
68 JI Aidan Y. 100% 99% 82% 46% 14% 2% -
69 MOHAMED Amir 100% 99% 90% 65% 31% 8% 1%
70 BURBERRY Alan 100% 94% 56% 18% 3% - -
71 TOMINO rafael 100% 99% 91% 66% 32% 8% 1%
72 KULKARNI Ansh A. 100% 100% 99% 92% 69% 32% 6%
73 SYLVESTER William Z. 100% 92% 62% 26% 6% 1% -
74 KLYCZEK Andrew 100% 97% 70% 28% 5% - -
75 WANG Waley 100% 83% 44% 13% 2% - -
76 YU Jonathan J. 100% 99% 83% 46% 13% 2% -
77 PALMA Matthew Dominic 100% 95% 74% 39% 13% 2% -
78 LI Matthew 100% 99% 87% 55% 21% 4% -
79 TSIMIKLIS Yanni 100% 98% 87% 58% 25% 6% 1%
80 DESHMUKH Arjun 100% 100% 99% 89% 59% 23% 4%
81 PAI Lakshan K. 100% 100% 97% 83% 49% 15% 2%
82 TORRES Treston 100% 99% 87% 52% 15% 2% -
83 FOTENOS Noah T. 100% 95% 68% 28% 6% 1% -
84 WONG Garrick G. 100% 100% 98% 88% 62% 28% 5%
85 LI Bojun 100% 69% 26% 5% 1% - -
86 WOODTHORPE Michael G. 100% 90% 45% 9% 1% - -
87 SANTOS Carlos R. 100% 80% 40% 11% 2% - -
88 ZHAI Jeffrey 100% 100% 94% 70% 34% 9% 1%
88 PROMRAT Pete 100% 95% 72% 36% 10% 1% -
88 MCRAE Bruce 100% 98% 83% 49% 18% 3% -
91 KITAGAWA Eric S. 100% 99% 87% 51% 17% 3% -
91 JIN Dennis H. 100% 97% 77% 35% 8% 1% -
93 DRESSEL Jet 100% 77% 38% 11% 2% - -
94 SYOMICHEV Gleb A. 100% 99% 87% 55% 21% 4% -
95 CHIN Ryan 100% 61% 19% 3% - - -
96 LIN Michael 100% 98% 82% 46% 14% 2% -
97 BERNABE Rafael 100% 58% 17% 2% - -
98 HONG ISSAC 100% 96% 73% 33% 7% -
99 SURINGA William J. 100% 95% 68% 30% 6% -
100 GEOGHEGAN Ronan 100% 100% 98% 87% 60% 26% 5%
101 GUEVARRA Gabriel (Gabe) W. 100% 99% 82% 44% 13% 2% -
102 WONG Ethan 100% 97% 75% 34% 7% 1% -
103 HOGGARD Carson 100% 60% 17% 2% - - -
104 QIU Daniel 100% 98% 84% 51% 18% 3% -
105 MILLER Aidan A. 100% 95% 68% 30% 7% 1% -
106 WEGMAN Jack 100% 91% 64% 29% 8% 1% -
107 IVANENKO Alex 100% 38% 5% - - - -
108 TSIMMERMAN Michael 100% 92% 57% 18% 3% - -
109 DAVIDSON Elliot 100% 87% 48% 14% 2% - -
110 HECHT Joel 100% 95% 70% 30% 7% 1% -
111 JONES Theodore M. 100% 94% 62% 19% 2% - -
112 LI Lianhao 100% 34% 5% - - - -
113 FERBER Oliver E. 100% 52% 13% 2% - - -
114 ADAMS Cyrus 100% 59% 16% 2% - - -
115 ALONSO Vinicius 100% 81% 33% 6% 1% - -
116 LEE Jacob 100% 66% 24% 5% 1% - -
117 JONES Taajuddin 100% 25% 3% - - - -
117 WANG Jeremy 100% 46% 10% 1% - - -
119 RADTKE Jakob 100% 51% 11% 1% - - -
120 POCHE Zachary 100% 82% 39% 8% 1% - -
120 MCQUIDE elliot 100% 24% 2% - - - -
122 HEISE Alexander D. 100% 44% 7% - - - -
122 SLOUGH Sean 100% 79% 31% 5% - - -
124 RAGAN STEINSSON Sigurdur 100% 91% 61% 24% 4% - -
125 CHOO Christopher Y. 100% 40% 7% 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.