The Fencing Center of San Jose - San Jose, 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 | BERMENDER Cameron | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 67% |
| 2 | OTAKE Jared K. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 29% |
| 3 | OH Samuel H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 38% | |
| 3 | VAZQUEZ Zander | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 34% |
| 5 | WOO Christian | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 63% | 20% | |
| 6 | ZENG Lucas H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 47% |
| 7 | VALOUEV Aleksey | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 34% | 7% | - |
| 8 | DARIANO Noah G. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 21% |
| 9 | DESAI Nalin H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 45% | |
| 10 | XIAO EDWARD | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 28% |
| 11 | WYMAN Julian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 32% | 5% |
| 12 | SISINNI Riccardo | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 41% | 9% | - |
| 13 | SUNG Chang-Han S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 28% | |
| 14 | ZHANG Luke T. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 27% | |
| 15 | KIM Ryan Y. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 35% | 7% |
| 16 | HSIUNG Richie | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 39% | 8% |
| 17 | CANLAS Nathan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 40% | 10% |
| 18 | KHER Roan | 100% | 98% | 86% | 58% | 26% | 6% | 1% |
| 19 | MA Bryant | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 20 | MCCOSH Evin M. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 63% | 23% | 3% | |
| 21 | TSAY Jeremy M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 52% | 14% |
| 22 | DETERING Julian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 47% | 7% |
| 23 | JAUME Andrei | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 23% | 4% |
| 24 | MYERS Dean | 100% | 98% | 83% | 48% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 25 | HOSKERI Anik S. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 33% | 6% | |
| 26 | FULTON Richard A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 46% | 9% |
| 27 | ZHENG zhe | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
| 28 | DINSAY Kristjan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 40% | 9% | - |
| 29 | WANG Ethan | 100% | 98% | 77% | 37% | 9% | 1% | |
| 30 | GONZALEZ Matthew | 100% | 100% | 78% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 31 | ZHANG Jiening (Jason) | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
| 31 | SEEDS Edward T. | 100% | 96% | 77% | 42% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 33 | NG Kenneth | 100% | 94% | 62% | 23% | 4% | - | |
| 34 | CHEN Justin K. | 100% | 95% | 70% | 29% | 5% | - | |
| 35 | SETLUR Bhrugu | 100% | 73% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 36 | CHENG Jonathan | 100% | 82% | 45% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 37 | BAEK David | 100% | 95% | 69% | 28% | 5% | - | |
| 38 | FINNEY Lorenz | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 21% | 3% | |
| 39 | WU Lucas | 100% | 92% | 66% | 31% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 40 | LI Matthew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 29% | 5% |
| 41 | MA Andrew | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 42% | 13% | 2% |
| 42 | BALDWIN Timothy M. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 70% | 33% | 8% | 1% |
| 43 | AIKEN Nicholas A. | 100% | 96% | 73% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 44 | BOUCHARD Kai | 100% | 50% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 45 | REICHEL Ezra | 100% | 72% | 28% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 46 | SHEN Owen | 100% | 96% | 74% | 33% | 6% | - | |
| 47 | SMITH Grant D. | 100% | 85% | 43% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 48 | CORTRIGHT Joshua C. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 62% | 22% | 3% | |
| 49 | TEH Ryan | 100% | 95% | 68% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 50 | ZHU Rui | 100% | 97% | 73% | 29% | 5% | - | - |
| 51 | EDISON Ansel | 100% | 76% | 32% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 52 | FANG Jaden | 100% | 89% | 52% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 53 | PIERCE Aaron | 100% | 95% | 74% | 39% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 54 | LIM Charles Q. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 55 | MAK Osman K. | 100% | 55% | 14% | 2% | - | - | |
| 55 | AGRAWAL Niki | 100% | 41% | 7% | 1% | - | - | |
| 57 | LI Jett | 100% | 90% | 61% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 58 | RUBIN Max | 100% | 57% | 16% | 2% | - | - | |
| 59 | BECKER Ethan | 100% | 21% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 60 | GUO Hairuo | 100% | 86% | 47% | 12% | 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.