Ontario Convention Center - Hall A & B - Ontario, 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 | XU Jia Bao (Bowen) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 77% | 32% | |
2 | LUH Ethan K. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 47% |
3 | WOO Christian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% |
3 | KRYLTSOV Michael | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 56% | 15% |
5 | CANLAS Nathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 37% |
6 | JAIN Aditya | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 64% |
7 | NAYGAS LAWRENCE I. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 27% |
8 | MORROW Brenden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 35% | 6% |
9 | CO Dylan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 24% |
9 | SIU Aiden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 65% |
11 | DETERING Julian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 40% |
12 | HOSKERI Anik S. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 51% | 14% | |
13 | MARTIN IV Elmer D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 37% |
14 | KIM Minhyeok | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 66% | 23% |
15 | SMITH Grant D. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 50% | 13% | 1% |
16 | KIM Ryan Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 67% | 22% | |
17 | ZHANG Yun Isaac | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 51% |
18 | NAVARRO Kato | 100% | 94% | 62% | 23% | 4% | - | |
19 | OH Jaden | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 52% | 18% | 3% |
20 | LEUNG Chu Ming Aiden | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 26% | 4% |
21 | PONS Diego | 100% | 98% | 83% | 49% | 17% | 3% | - |
22 | ZHANG Aaron | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 33% | 5% |
23 | YU Jason | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 26% | 4% |
24 | RASMUSSEN Sage | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 49% | 14% | 1% |
25 | LIU Zixian (Aaron) | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 43% | 10% | 1% |
26 | ZHOU Hao Kai (Kevin) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 66% | 25% | 4% |
27 | SHEN Owen | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 45% | 11% | |
28 | LYNCH Owen C. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 41% | 10% | 1% |
29 | WEI Qiancheng (Matt) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 44% | 10% |
30 | SOTO-ULEV Aden A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 49% | 8% |
31 | MYERS Dean | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 7% | |
32 | PIESNER Zachary C. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 57% | 21% | 3% | |
33 | WU Alber Y. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 16% | 2% |
34 | BAEK David | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 38% | 8% | |
35 | DERRICK Blake | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 16% | 2% | |
36 | CHEN Justin K. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 58% | 19% | 2% | |
37 | MA Andrew | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 47% | 13% | |
38 | GREENEBAUM Oliver | 100% | 48% | 11% | 1% | < 1% | - | |
39 | TEH Ryan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 42% | 11% | 1% |
40 | LO Preston | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 23% | 3% |
40 | MA Bryant | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 48% | 14% | 1% |
42 | SAH Steven | 100% | 88% | 47% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
43 | FUKUDA Diego | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 37% | 5% |
44 | PARK Rion | 100% | 95% | 73% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - |
45 | LI Avery Peihong | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 43% | 9% |
46 | WONG Evan | 100% | 94% | 70% | 34% | 9% | 1% | - |
47 | DINSAY Kristjan | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 29% | 6% | |
48 | YI William | 100% | 97% | 78% | 40% | 11% | 1% | |
49 | BORG Matthew | 100% | 95% | 72% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - |
50 | LAM Nicolas | 100% | 99% | 86% | 52% | 17% | 3% | - |
51 | GOBBO Alexander | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 56% | 15% |
52 | RUBIN Max | 100% | 99% | 84% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - |
52 | EDISON Ansel | 100% | 97% | 80% | 45% | 14% | 2% | - |
54 | WANG Ethan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 37% | 10% | 1% |
55 | KIM Daniel Y. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 16% | 3% | - |
56 | LE Jacob W. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 22% | |
57 | PINCHENG Yao | 100% | 96% | 76% | 41% | 12% | 2% | |
58 | PARK Steve (Sangmin) | 100% | 78% | 30% | 5% | - | - | |
59 | ATTIA Aly | 100% | 100% | 95% | 78% | 45% | 14% | 1% |
60 | LI Jett | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 34% | 9% | 1% |
61 | PARK Sky | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 25% | 4% |
62 | LE Jacob H. | 100% | 70% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - | |
63 | ZHOU Oscar J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 22% | |
64 | SCHIENEMAN Valentine | 100% | 78% | 34% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
65 | LLIDO Soren | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 46% | 14% | 2% |
66 | UHLIG Cole | 100% | 92% | 65% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - |
67 | TUAN Evan | 100% | 94% | 63% | 25% | 5% | - | |
68 | LI Matthew | 100% | 99% | 88% | 52% | 15% | 2% | |
69 | WU Lucas | 100% | 99% | 87% | 55% | 19% | 3% | |
70 | REICHEL Ezra | 100% | 99% | 86% | 41% | 9% | 1% | - |
71 | LING Carson Jr | 100% | 93% | 64% | 24% | 4% | - | - |
72 | TONKOVICH Ryan | 100% | 90% | 57% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
73 | ZHAO Bowen | 100% | 96% | 78% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - |
74 | CHOURASIA Ashirvad | 100% | 80% | 38% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
75 | TULYAG Azim | 100% | 89% | 53% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
76 | PARK David | 100% | 71% | 29% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
77 | TSAY Jordan R. | 100% | 96% | 77% | 41% | 12% | 1% | - |
78 | SIDDIQI Amman | 100% | 37% | 6% | - | - | - | - |
79 | HE Bourne | 100% | 48% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
80 | WILLEY Emerson | 100% | 39% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
81 | MONTGOMERY Georgie | 100% | 75% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
82 | CHANG Nathan | 100% | 79% | 36% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
83 | ZHAN Kevin | 100% | 96% | 70% | 30% | 6% | 1% | - |
83 | YORK Lucas | 100% | 78% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
85 | KHER Roan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 27% | 4% |
86 | CHUN Dashel | 100% | 76% | 31% | 6% | - | - | - |
87 | NISHIHIRA Tyler | 100% | 59% | 15% | 2% | - | - | |
88 | BUTLER Owen | 100% | 84% | 49% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
89 | DULAI Angad | 100% | 88% | 51% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
90 | MAK Osman K. | 100% | 65% | 23% | 4% | - | - | - |
91 | GORDON William L. | 100% | 50% | 12% | 1% | - | - | |
92 | FLANAGAN Miles | 100% | 97% | 71% | 28% | 5% | - | - |
93 | PETROV Mikhail | 100% | 81% | 25% | 3% | - | - | - |
94 | MORTON Joshua | 100% | 93% | 64% | 28% | 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.