RIMAC Arena @ UC San Diego - La Jolla, CA, 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 | LATIF IMRAN ZAKARIYYA | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 27% |
2 | SINGHA Orion | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 37% |
3 | DAVOODIAN Christopher | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 33% | 7% |
3 | ZHENG Haoran | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 70% | 27% | |
5 | SARKAR agniv | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 25% | 4% |
6 | YAO Geoffrey B. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 32% | 6% |
7 | GAO Chaney C. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 13% | |
8 | WANG DEVON | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 33% |
9 | HIGGINS Branford | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 29% | |
10 | JIN daniel | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 14% | |
11 | FU Leon | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 38% | 9% | |
12 | WATT Darren | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 20% | 3% | |
13 | ALVAREZ Ian T. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 27% | 5% |
14 | WRIGHT Christopher | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 29% | 6% | |
15 | YAO Derek (Shunyu) | 100% | 92% | 64% | 28% | 6% | 1% | |
16 | KIM Sullivan | 100% | 98% | 82% | 49% | 16% | 2% | |
17 | SARKAR Anish | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 54% | 21% | 3% |
18 | DRIBIN Ezra | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 42% | 9% |
19 | SCHROEDER Dylan | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 36% | 10% | 1% |
20 | KHANNA Nikhil | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 56% | 18% |
21 | PHUKAN Rohin | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 29% | 5% | |
22 | DOWDELL Riley | 100% | 97% | 80% | 45% | 14% | 2% | |
23 | KNUDSEN Travis | 100% | 98% | 85% | 53% | 20% | 4% | - |
24 | PARK Augustine | 100% | 91% | 62% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
25 | WANG owen | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 25% | 4% |
26 | LO Jake | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 38% | 9% | |
27 | LEE Chun Po | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 37% | 10% | 1% |
28 | CHEN Zhengyang | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
29 | RICHARDS Jackson D. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 74% | 38% | 9% | |
29 | ANDERSON Kai | 100% | 95% | 70% | 33% | 8% | 1% | |
31 | MCDONALD Ethan | 100% | 94% | 69% | 32% | 8% | 1% | |
32 | MENDOZA Zander | 100% | 67% | 26% | 5% | 1% | - | |
33 | BAZHENOV Anthony | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 43% | 14% | 2% |
34 | GALLO James | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 23% |
35 | DEKERMANJI Christopher | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 52% | 14% | |
36 | DE LA TORRE PEREZ Jesus Adiel | 100% | 77% | 38% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
37 | ZHANG Alec | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 45% | 11% |
38 | PRAKASH Hari | 100% | 96% | 73% | 38% | 11% | 2% | - |
39 | KIM Nathan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 47% | 14% | 2% |
40 | EVERS Gabriel | 100% | 97% | 78% | 42% | 13% | 2% | |
41 | LIU Yikun | 100% | 66% | 24% | 5% | - | - | |
42 | LIU Noah | 100% | 66% | 23% | 4% | - | - | |
43 | LOFTUS Luca | 100% | 77% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | |
44 | CHEN Bailey | 100% | 98% | 85% | 56% | 24% | 5% | - |
45 | GAO Zachary | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 33% | 8% | 1% |
46 | JU Hanul | 100% | 86% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
47 | YU Austin | 100% | 91% | 62% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
48 | BRUSKOTTER Reiland | 100% | 98% | 86% | 56% | 21% | 3% | |
49 | GUPTA Karan | 100% | 97% | 79% | 44% | 13% | 2% | |
50 | VILLALOBOSKOWALSKI Demetrious C. | 100% | 85% | 49% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
51 | BURLING Trenor | 100% | 96% | 71% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - |
52 | PAK Elliot | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 19% | 4% | - |
53 | DONAHUE Lake | 100% | 89% | 57% | 22% | 5% | - | - |
54 | POSSON Luke | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 44% | 14% | 2% |
55 | CHEN Josh | 100% | 53% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - |
56 | ERLIKHMAN Adrian | 100% | 92% | 57% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
57 | OBERDERFER Vladimir | 100% | 90% | 56% | 20% | 3% | - | |
58 | MIAO Kunqi | 100% | 85% | 49% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
59 | KIM Justin | 100% | 72% | 30% | 7% | 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.