SportsPlex at Metuchen - Metuchen, NJ, USA
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 | YU Vinni | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 34% |
| 2 | HASSAN Mohamed H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 63% |
| 3 | BRUK Peter J. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 37% | 8% | |
| 3 | SERVELLO Augusto | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 52% | 12% |
| 5 | KWON Ethan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 39% |
| 6 | JOSEPH Dominic (Dom) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 25% |
| 7 | MITCHELL Philip D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 53% | 12% |
| 8 | NAGER Noah | 100% | 100% | 99% | 86% | 53% | 18% | 3% |
| 9 | LEE Aidan | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 7% | |
| 10 | KAO Castor T. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 20% |
| 11 | DAI Jonathan T. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 13% |
| 12 | FOGELSON Frederick J. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 34% | 7% | |
| 12 | SULLIVAN Jackson R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 54% | |
| 14 | GRAHAM Roy J. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 52% | 16% | |
| 15 | SONG Bryan | 100% | 81% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 16 | COSTELLO Chaissen F. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 37% | 8% | |
| 17 | JIANG Owen | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 34% | 8% | 1% |
| 18 | WELCH Kyle J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 51% |
| 19 | AHN Jun | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 37% | 8% | |
| 20 | ZHENG Alan H. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 21% | |
| 21 | BUERGIN Aidan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 61% | 22% | 3% |
| 22 | LEE Jacob J | 100% | 100% | 98% | 82% | 46% | 14% | 2% |
| 23 | BAE Kevin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 38% | 7% |
| 24 | RUSADZE Nickolas | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 30% | 5% |
| 25 | LI Richard | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% |
| 26 | KIM Yonjae | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 25% | 4% | |
| 27 | LE Vyn A. | 100% | 89% | 56% | 22% | 4% | - | |
| 28 | SHA Yi Peng | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 29% | 5% | |
| 29 | LIN Richard W. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 16% | |
| 30 | KLOTZ Isaiah | 100% | 95% | 70% | 30% | 6% | - | - |
| 31 | LIANG Lixi (Henry) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 23% |
| 32 | PYO Michael M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 45% | 9% |
| 33 | DU Samuel R. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 17% | 2% |
| 34 | DESANDO Michael R. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 50% | 10% | |
| 35 | WU Alexander | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 62% | 22% | |
| 36 | SCHLESINGER Nathan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 36% | 8% | |
| 37 | DOBBINS Evan W. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 29% | 3% |
| 38 | LI Eric | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 29% | 5% |
| 39 | ZOBEL Eric H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 61% | 13% |
| 40 | CHAN Tyler | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 21% | 2% |
| 41 | COZINE Owen N. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 37% | 7% |
| 42 | TSAY Jeremy M. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 23% | 4% |
| 43 | LINALDI Alberto | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 32% | 7% |
| 44 | ZHEN Ethan | 100% | 90% | 59% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
| 45 | ZELTSER Lawrence M. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 31% | 6% | |
| 46 | GONG Benjamin | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 19% | 3% | |
| 47 | PO Oliver | 100% | 98% | 82% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 48 | LU Yikai | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 62% | 24% | 3% |
| 49 | TAHOUN Mostafa | 100% | 98% | 80% | 34% | 5% | - | - |
| 50 | TEMPLE Jackson | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 78% | 42% | 9% |
| 51 | KLOSTERMANN Max | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 47% | 13% | |
| 52 | GAO William | 100% | 89% | 56% | 22% | 5% | - | |
| 53 | SEZER Kaya | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 43% | 10% | |
| 54 | DEGREMONT Henri S. | 100% | 96% | 78% | 43% | 14% | 2% | |
| 55 | LIU Eric Y. | 100% | 98% | 84% | 53% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 56 | LIN James G. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 28% | 7% | 1% |
| 57 | STRAYER Andrew | 100% | 100% | 93% | 65% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 58 | ELWOOD Sebastian F. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 61% | 17% | 2% | - |
| 59 | BROWN Alexander R. | 100% | 94% | 67% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 60 | TIKHAEV Alexander | 100% | 47% | 10% | 1% | - | - | |
| 61 | DAUM Charlie | 100% | 82% | 44% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 62 | ZHAI Jeffrey | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 33% | 7% | |
| 62 | SICHITIU Alexander | 100% | 98% | 85% | 52% | 18% | 2% | |
| 64 | WANG Gerald Y. | 100% | 91% | 61% | 25% | 5% | - | |
| 65 | TSAI Max W. | 100% | 74% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 66 | KEE Andrew L. | 100% | 94% | 68% | 32% | 8% | 1% | |
| 67 | WANG Michael | 100% | 89% | 48% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 68 | LEE Jonah | 100% | 91% | 54% | 16% | 2% | - | |
| 69 | EVANS Aidan | 100% | 98% | 84% | 47% | 12% | 1% | |
| 70 | LANG Dong Lin | 100% | 99% | 85% | 48% | 13% | 1% | |
| 71 | ORLOV Dmitriy | 100% | 93% | 58% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 72 | KNIZHNIK David | 100% | 96% | 77% | 42% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 73 | SHAO Eric | 100% | 83% | 39% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 73 | BADLANI Dev | 100% | 93% | 64% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 75 | MURPHY Damian J. | 100% | 51% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 76 | AMRANI David | 100% | 49% | 11% | 1% | - | - | |
| 77 | LEWIS Akhil | 100% | 81% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 78 | DAVIS Christopher M. | 100% | 86% | 52% | 19% | 4% | - | |
| 79 | TRAUGOT Owen G. | 100% | 89% | 58% | 23% | 5% | - | - |
| 80 | YOON DYLAN | 100% | 81% | 41% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 81 | JIN Dennis H. | 100% | 90% | 33% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 81 | BOOTSMA Shane-Anson | 100% | 92% | 64% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 81 | WU Michael | 100% | 82% | 32% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 84 | HUANG Eythan | 100% | 69% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 85 | MATSAKH Philip | 100% | 86% | 49% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 86 | ZHUANG Chuanxuan | 100% | 54% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 87 | REZA Farazi | 100% | 78% | 28% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 88 | TSAI William | 100% | 20% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 89 | MENG Zhaoyi | 100% | 94% | 67% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 90 | RUSSO Frank | 100% | 70% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 91 | COTLAR Andrew D. | 100% | 97% | 77% | 32% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 92 | MURDOCH Walter | 100% | 77% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
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.