Salt Lake City, UT - Salt Lake City, UT, 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 | O'LOUGHLIN Chris S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% |
| 2 | DEUCHER Joseph H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 49% | |
| 3 | MECHKOV Iliya | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 51% | 10% |
| 3 | LANG Markus | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 35% | 6% | |
| 5 | AMELI Sean | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 48% |
| 6 | REES Daniel I. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 72% | 23% | |
| 7 | FRANK Fred | 100% | 99% | 88% | 59% | 23% | 4% | |
| 8 | ROOD Alex | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 26% | 5% | |
| 9 | HUDSON Jeffrey (Jeff) A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 53% | |
| 10 | POULIQUEN Benoit (Ben) | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 43% | 11% | |
| 11 | LOEFFLER Carl E. | 100% | 97% | 82% | 47% | 14% | 1% | |
| 12 | WALLACE Patric | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 41% | |
| 13 | JOHNSON Jeff | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 37% | 2% |
| 14 | MAZZOLI Julio C. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 54% | 14% | 1% |
| 15 | NIXON Mark | 100% | 100% | 98% | 81% | 37% | 6% | |
| 16 | PERKA Michael | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 38% | 9% | |
| 17 | WATRALL Rick | 100% | 99% | 95% | 77% | 45% | 15% | 2% |
| 18 | SUMLER Jeffery | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 34% | 6% |
| 19 | GILLHAM Timothy A. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 45% | 12% | |
| 20 | NGUYEN Cuong T. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 41% | 5% | |
| 21 | DESAMOURS Georges H. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 48% | 11% | - |
| 22 | SUVEG Bela | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 21% |
| 23 | BECK Brian C. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 32% | 9% | 1% |
| 24 | POPPRE Michael N. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 36% | 5% | |
| 25 | HAYENGA Gary M. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 47% | 9% | |
| 26 | GUMAGAY Paul | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 36% | 8% | 1% |
| 27 | HITCHCOCK David | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 51% | |
| 28 | SKOPIK Jr August | 100% | 99% | 90% | 55% | 17% | 2% | |
| 29 | BALESTRACCI Chris | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 7% | |
| 30 | TRIFILETTI Lawrence T. | 100% | 85% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 31 | DAVIS Andrew | 100% | 93% | 65% | 27% | 6% | 1% | |
| 32 | KRUGER Mark (Mark Kruger) | 100% | 85% | 46% | 12% | 1% | - | |
| 33 | GREENE II Charles E. | 100% | 98% | 82% | 45% | 12% | 1% | |
| 34 | SWANSON Dave | 100% | 98% | 84% | 45% | 10% | - | |
| 35 | BARAFF David | 100% | 74% | 29% | 5% | - | - | |
| 35 | PARTE Aidan | 100% | 47% | 6% | < 1% | - | - | |
| 37 | FANGMAN Daniel L. | 100% | 78% | 35% | 7% | - | - | |
| 38 | FELDMAN Adam | 100% | 100% | 94% | 72% | 36% | 9% | 1% |
| 39 | JENSEN David | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 39% | 9% | |
| 40 | POPOVICI Alexander M. | 100% | 98% | 82% | 51% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 41 | LEE Stephen K. | 100% | 94% | 65% | 26% | 6% | - | - |
| 42 | STEWART Robert | 100% | 93% | 66% | 27% | 5% | - | |
| 43 | SPENCER Richard (Spenc) E. | 100% | 76% | 24% | 3% | - | - | |
| 44 | SCHULTZ Douglas B. | 100% | 74% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 45 | CLINEFELTER Dennis S. | 100% | 77% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 46 | ESVAL Kevin | 100% | 96% | 76% | 39% | 11% | 1% | |
| 47 | KUHN Jeffrey | 100% | 61% | 20% | 3% | - | - | |
| 48 | KAUFMAN Joel H. | 100% | 98% | 78% | 31% | 5% | - | - |
| 49 | BEITTEL David F. | 100% | 90% | 58% | 23% | 5% | - | - |
| 50 | RIFKIND Neil | 100% | 50% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 51 | KAIN Brad | 100% | 65% | 18% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 52 | OCHS Bradley C. | 100% | 99% | 83% | 46% | 13% | 1% | - |
| 53 | WILLIAMS Richard | 100% | 72% | 25% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 54 | ABELE Chris | 100% | 86% | 42% | 7% | - | - | |
| 55 | NEMAZIE David A. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 58% | 13% | 1% | |
| 55 | LIPTON Michael D. | 100% | 77% | 33% | 6% | - | - | |
| 57 | ROGERS John D. | 100% | 89% | 56% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
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.