Salt Lake City, UT - Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Color shade indicates the magnitude of a surprise (positive or negative). Grey means no suprise. Read more.
| # | Name | Bout Difficulty vs. Outcome * | Pool Victories | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pool | DE | Exp. | Act. | Diff. | ||
| 1 | PIMOUTKINE Roustam R. | V D V V V | V V V V V | 3.4 | 4 | +0.6 |
| 2 | HABALA Peter | V V V V V | V V V V D | 4.7 | 5 | +0.3 |
| 3 | JOHANSON David B. | D D V D V V | V V V V D | 3.0 | 3 | - |
| 3 | WYSZYNSKI Marek B. | V V V V V V | V V V D | 5.9 | 6 | +0.1 |
| 5 | CHEN David A. | V V V V V V | V V D | 4.4 | 6 | +1.6 |
| 6 | ANDERSON Kristian S. | V V V V V | V V D | 4.3 | 5 | +0.7 |
| 7 | STRICKLAND Michael C. | V V V V V | V V D | 3.5 | 5 | +1.5 |
| 8 | PAVLOVICH Robert | V V D D D | V V V D | 3.8 | 2 | -1.8 |
| 9 | BANKS Alexander S. | V V V V V | V D | 2.8 | 5 | +2.2 |
| 10 | KOEHN Ted | D V V V V | V D | 3.0 | 4 | +1.0 |
| 11 | DOURAGHY Jamie M. | V V V D V | V D | 4.7 | 4 | -0.7 |
| 12 | MARTOS Darwin C. | V V V V D D | V V D | 3.5 | 4 | +0.5 |
| 13 | LEE Stephen K. | V D D V V | V V D | 3.6 | 3 | -0.6 |
| 14 | CHO Michael | D V V V D | V V D | 4.5 | 3 | -1.5 |
| 15 | TANG Julian | D V V D D V | V V D | 5.1 | 3 | -2.1 |
| 16 | HENDRICKS Ron | D V D V V D | V V D | 3.0 | 3 | - |
| 17 | LAWRENCE John W. | V V V V V V | D | 5.1 | 6 | +0.9 |
| 18 | CAMERON Matt W. | V V V V V | D | 2.8 | 5 | +2.2 |
| 19 | KAIHATSU Edward J. | V V V D V V | D | 5.3 | 5 | -0.3 |
| 20 | DIAZ HERNANDEZ Yasmany E. | V V V D V | D | 4.3 | 4 | -0.3 |
| 21 | VOYIAZIAKIS Emanuel | V D V D V V | V D | 3.7 | 4 | +0.3 |
| 22 | LEBLANC Gerald (Jerry) A. | V D D V V V | V D | 3.9 | 4 | +0.1 |
| 23 | WILLEY David S. | D D V V V | V D | 2.5 | 3 | +0.5 |
| 24 | ESTELL Oscar M. | V V V D D | V D | 2.2 | 3 | +0.8 |
| 25 | WILBERT Matt | V D D V V D | V D | 3.1 | 3 | -0.1 |
| 26 | GROSS Stephen R. | D V D V V D | V D | 3.1 | 3 | -0.1 |
| 27 | GRISWOLD Doug | D V D V D | V D | 1.2 | 2 | +0.8 |
| 28 | FADL Omar | D V V D D | V D | 2.6 | 2 | -0.6 |
| 29 | KISSINGFORD John F. | V D D D V | V D | 3.2 | 2 | -1.2 |
| 30 | PATTERSON Jan (Janmon) M. | D V D D V | V D | 3.3 | 2 | -1.3 |
| 31 | HAYENGA Gary M. | V D D D D | V D | 2.2 | 1 | -1.2 |
| 32 | JONES Bryan T. | D D D D V | V D | 1.3 | 1 | -0.3 |
| 33 | LUONG Allen | D D V V V D | D | 3.2 | 3 | -0.2 |
| 34 | DRAKE David L. | D V V D D V | D | 2.9 | 3 | +0.1 |
| 35 | VALENTINE Iain | D D V V D | D | 1.6 | 2 | +0.4 |
| 36 | BERKE Daniel (Dan) L. | V D D D V | D | 0.9 | 2 | +1.1 |
| 37 | KLEIN Johannes | V D D V D | D | 2.3 | 2 | -0.3 |
| 38 | WU Clarence C. | V D D V D D | D | 1.8 | 2 | +0.2 |
| 39 | ALLAN Peter L. | D V D V D D | D | 0.5 | 2 | +1.5 |
| 40 | NEWSON Frank | D V D D D | D | 1.1 | 1 | -0.1 |
| 41 | MAHNKEN Thomas G. | D D D V D | D | 0.9 | 1 | +0.1 |
| 42 | ZEISS Gary M. | D D V D D | D | 0.9 | 1 | +0.1 |
| 43 | LEYLAND John | D D D V D | D | 0.6 | 1 | +0.4 |
| 44 | POWERS Douglas A. | D D D D V D | D | 2.5 | 1 | -1.5 |
| 45 | KIRSHNER Ronald | V D D D D D | D | 1.2 | 1 | -0.2 |
| 46 | WHITESIDES Scott M. | D V D D D D | D | 1.4 | 1 | -0.4 |
| 47 | GALLUCH Peter G. | D D D D D | D | 1.6 | 0 | -1.6 |
| 48 | YOO Terry S. | D D D D D | D | 0.6 | 0 | -0.6 |
| 49 | STEINMAN Jack | D D D D D | D | 0.5 | 0 | -0.5 |
| 50 | CAIN Russell (Russ) P. | D D D D D D | D | 0.3 | 0 | -0.3 |
| 51 | PREUD'HOMME Xavier A. | D D D D D D | D | 0.2 | 0 | -0.2 |
Color coded boxes represent the outcome against opponents of varying difficulty levels from the perspective of the fencer. Letters inside the boxes indicate victory (V) and defeat (D).
| Color | Outcome | Opponent's Difficulty | Probability of Victory |
|---|---|---|---|
| Victory | Very Hard | 0% to 20% | |
| Victory | Hard | 20% to 40% | |
| Victory | Roughly Even | 40% to 60% | |
| Victory | Easy | 60% to 80% | |
| Victory | Very Easy | 80% to 100% | |
| Defeat | Very Hard | 0% to 20% | |
| Defeat | Hard | 20% to 40% | |
| Defeat | Roughly Even | 40% to 60% | |
| Defeat | Easy | 60% to 80% | |
| Defeat | Very Easy | 80% to 100% |
The visual cues provided in this table highlight bouts that may be considered surprises based on the relative strengths of the competitors:
This visualization is designed to give both fencers and spectators an immediate sense of the unexpected outcomes of the competition. While every bout has its unique circumstances, these indicators can help highlight moments where a fencer overcame the odds or where there was an unexpected turn of events.