Fortune Fencing ROC, VET & RJCC Reg Opens 2/1

Junior Men's Épée

Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 12:00 PM

Anaheim, CA - Anaheim, CA, 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 CANDELA Nicholas - - - 4% 20% 43% 33%
2 DAO Matthew M. - - - 2% 14% 40% 43%
3 JIN Nicholas - 2% 8% 23% 34% 26% 7%
3 NORBUTAS Jackson S. - - - 2% 13% 41% 44%
5 JEONG Connor - - - 1% 6% 33% 60%
6 JEON Alexander E. - - - 2% 13% 39% 45%
7 EMARA Omar 2% 13% 31% 33% 17% 4% -
8 BRISLAWN Reilly R. - - 1% 8% 27% 41% 23%
9 CAI Kevin P. - - 3% 19% 45% 32%
10 ROBINSON Riley - - 5% 22% 43% 29%
11 WESTPHAL David R. - - 1% 7% 26% 43% 22%
12 DIEDERICHS Jimmy G. 2% 13% 32% 34% 16% 3% -
13 LIN Kyran - 1% 8% 29% 43% 19%
14 DOLMETSCH Max - - 3% 13% 33% 37% 14%
15 SHARMA Sanil - - 1% 6% 24% 44% 26%
16 MOHEBI Saam - 1% 6% 23% 38% 27% 6%
17 LOGUE Ethan D. - 2% 10% 28% 37% 20% 4%
18 PARK Elliot - 3% 15% 32% 33% 15% 2%
19 TARBUSKOVICH III John - 1% 5% 21% 39% 29% 5%
20 WEAVER Neil - 3% 18% 35% 31% 11% 1%
21 AHN Gus 2% 16% 36% 33% 12% 2%
22 KIM Benjamin I. 1% 6% 23% 37% 27% 6%
23 WONG Nicholas A. - - 3% 16% 37% 34% 9%
23 COOPER Rowan - 1% 8% 27% 37% 22% 5%
25 ZHANG Alec 1% 9% 29% 36% 20% 5% -
26 MOSES Alexander - - 1% 5% 23% 43% 28%
27 LEVY Zachari I. - - 2% 11% 32% 40% 15%
28 GRAYSON Shane W. - 3% 16% 34% 33% 13% 2%
29 LUCERO-OLSON Aydin 1% 8% 28% 37% 21% 5% -
30 KOPPE Alexander 1% 11% 30% 35% 18% 4% -
31 ZHOU Stanley Q. 1% 8% 26% 37% 22% 5% -
32 USHER Alexander 1% 11% 31% 37% 18% 3%
33 MA Victor 2% 17% 40% 30% 10% 1% < 1%
34 DOAN Joseph M. - - 3% 13% 33% 37% 14%
35 LATIF IMRAN ZAKARIYYA - - 3% 14% 32% 35% 15%
36 GALLO James 1% 9% 27% 37% 22% 4%
37 IVAKIMOV Vasil - - 1% 6% 24% 42% 26%
38 LEE Matthew C. - 3% 18% 36% 30% 11% 1%
39 JIN Daniel - 5% 23% 37% 26% 8% 1%
40 YUMIACO Nolan C. - 3% 13% 29% 33% 18% 4%
41 SINGHA Orion - 1% 10% 30% 37% 18% 3%
42 WESTON Tom 24% 42% 26% 7% 1% - -
43 KIM Sterling S. 1% 7% 25% 37% 24% 6% -
44 KIM Darius H. 2% 15% 33% 32% 14% 3% -
45 LIN Ryan - 1% 5% 21% 42% 31%
46 ZHU Max - 3% 15% 35% 36% 12%
47 PHUKAN Rohin 4% 21% 37% 28% 9% 1% -
48 HIGGINS Branford - 5% 23% 37% 26% 8% 1%
49 AU Marcus J. - 2% 11% 29% 36% 20% 3%
50 WANG DEVON - 4% 19% 38% 30% 9% 1%
51 STRAUSS Luke 4% 17% 32% 29% 14% 3% -
52 ZHOU Alec Q. 1% 8% 26% 36% 22% 6% 1%
53 FERRIERE Joshua 4% 28% 40% 22% 5% 1% -
54 LIANG Aaron 1% 7% 26% 41% 22% 4%
55 THOMPSON Chester 3% 18% 36% 30% 11% 1%
56 WELLS Tommy R. - - 5% 20% 37% 29% 8%
57 DUONG Enoch - 4% 19% 36% 30% 10% 1%
58 WONG Daniel - 2% 11% 31% 37% 17% 2%
59 HOLDERNESS Landon - 4% 17% 35% 31% 11% 1%
60 DEKERMANJI Christopher - 1% 8% 29% 39% 20% 3%
61 JAIN Sarthak 2% 16% 37% 32% 12% 2% -
62 LEE Chun Po 27% 42% 24% 6% 1% - -
63 MCDONALD Ethan 8% 39% 37% 14% 2% - -
64 CHIRASHNYA Adam 7% 27% 36% 23% 7% 1% -
65 ULINICH Alexander 33% 47% 17% 3% - - -
66 SCOFIELD Thien J. 2% 14% 32% 33% 16% 3% -
67 BHARGAV Siddharth 24% 43% 26% 6% 1% -
68 HARR Carver 15% 37% 33% 13% 2% -
69 PARK Augustine 7% 24% 34% 24% 9% 2% -
70 ZHENG Haoran 12% 42% 33% 11% 2% - -
71 BRUSKOTTER Reiland 7% 30% 40% 20% 4% -
72 NGO Ethan 56% 35% 8% 1% - -
73 ALVAREZ Ian T. 4% 27% 40% 23% 6% 1%
73 EVANS noah 18% 41% 31% 9% 1% -
75 CHON Joshua 1% 11% 30% 34% 19% 5% -
75 BAZHENOV Anthony 21% 39% 28% 10% 2% - -
77 SOOHOO Jackson F. 3% 17% 33% 30% 14% 3% -
78 WATT Darren 28% 42% 23% 6% 1% - -
79 SHA Michael 12% 35% 35% 15% 3% - -
80 WANG owen 20% 42% 28% 8% 1% - -
81 STENNIS Brendan 13% 38% 34% 13% 2% - -
82 BEAMS Yevgeny 21% 49% 24% 5% - - -
83 GU Aidan 19% 40% 29% 10% 2% -
84 PAK Elliot 54% 37% 8% 1% - - -
85 CHRISTENSEN Parker 60% 33% 6% - - - -
86 KIM Sullivan 63% 31% 5% - - - -
87 CROSSMAN Brandon 32% 48% 17% 3% - - -
88 VILLALOBOSKOWALSKI Demetrious C. 51% 37% 11% 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.