The Fencing Center of San Jose - San Jose, CA, USA
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 | HEDGES Philip S. | - | - | - | 2% | 22% | 76% | |
| 2 | WINTZ Paul K. | 1% | 6% | 19% | 32% | 28% | 12% | 2% |
| 3 | LEANG Priscilla Y. | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 44% | 25% | |
| 3 | ZAYDMAN David M. | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 13% | |
| 5 | WATT Darren | 1% | 17% | 52% | 26% | 4% | - | |
| 6 | WONG Kevin | - | 1% | 6% | 19% | 34% | 30% | 10% |
| 7 | ANGADALA Leela Krishna | - | 5% | 22% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
| 8 | KELLEY Thomas (TJ) J. | - | 2% | 15% | 45% | 34% | 4% | |
| 9 | AHMED Saheer | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 42% | 19% | |
| 10 | CHA Eugenie | 10% | 33% | 37% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 11 | WONG Nathan | 1% | 8% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 6% | |
| 12 | GAURAVDEEP Aj | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 8% |
| 13 | MADRID Maureen | 2% | 15% | 36% | 33% | 12% | 2% | |
| 14 | LIPTON Michael D. | 5% | 22% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% | |
| 15 | LOGUE Ethan D. | - | 1% | 14% | 45% | 37% | 4% | |
| 16 | SMAY II Joseph E. | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 16% | |
| 17 | SIRBU Dan | 1% | 15% | 35% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 18 | FALLICK Ozzie | 33% | 43% | 20% | 4% | - | - | |
| 19 | TONG Samuel | 4% | 27% | 39% | 23% | 6% | 1% | |
| 20 | ANDINO FRYDMAN Eli | 4% | 62% | 30% | 4% | - | - | |
| 21 | CHAUDRI Risha | 6% | 26% | 39% | 24% | 6% | - | |
| 22 | ENRILE Erica | 4% | 25% | 39% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 23 | LEONARDINI Barry M. | 10% | 29% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 24 | BENNETT Peter | 20% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 25 | SIMARD Sherrol A. | 75% | 22% | 2% | - | - | - | |
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.