Salt Lake City, UT - Salt Lake City, UT, 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 | MUGA Boris | - | - | 4% | 17% | 35% | 33% | 11% |
| 2 | LI Brian X | - | - | 1% | 10% | 46% | 43% | |
| 3 | TODREAS Simon | - | - | 2% | 14% | 36% | 36% | 12% |
| 3 | YAO Shun | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 5% |
| 5 | O'HARA Keegan J. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 43% | 28% |
| 6 | KAEDING Alexander (Alex) B. | - | 2% | 11% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 4% |
| 7 | DYER Carson C. | - | 6% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 6% | - |
| 8 | SMITH Jackson | - | - | < 1% | 3% | 19% | 44% | 33% |
| 9 | INSLER Ethan C. | - | - | 4% | 16% | 33% | 34% | 13% |
| 9 | BRISLAWN Reilly R. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 27% | 45% | 22% |
| 11 | XIAO Zherui | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 38% | 17% | 2% |
| 12 | KASTENBERG Leo M. | - | - | 7% | 32% | 40% | 18% | 3% |
| 13 | WESTMAAS Jonathan | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% |
| 14 | LAWLER Aidan | - | 2% | 11% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 5% |
| 15 | CHU Ian | - | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 2% |
| 16 | GOLDMAN Rami | - | 1% | 10% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 4% |
| 17 | SMAY II Joseph E. | 1% | 7% | 23% | 34% | 25% | 9% | 1% |
| 18 | CHUANG Kenneth H. | 3% | 18% | 34% | 29% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 19 | RYAN Christopher | 8% | 32% | 40% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 20 | PARCELEWICZ John M. | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 45% | 31% |
| 21 | WISNIEWSKI Bart | - | - | 6% | 27% | 41% | 23% | 4% |
| 22 | RYAN Seth C. | 1% | 6% | 22% | 35% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
| 23 | HOLDERNESS Landon | - | - | 1% | 12% | 52% | 35% | |
| 24 | BEITTEL David F. | 3% | 24% | 43% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 25 | FONG Joseph M. | 1% | 7% | 22% | 33% | 26% | 10% | 2% |
| 26 | BURCH Tristan H. | 5% | 23% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 27 | BARAFF David | 3% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 27 | RHEA Eric L. | 11% | 36% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 29 | YOUNGS Benjamin | 9% | 36% | 40% | 14% | 1% | - | |
| 30 | WILLIAMS Richard | 10% | 37% | 39% | 14% | 1% | - | |
| 31 | PARTE Aidan | 19% | 38% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
| 32 | KIM Dan | 19% | 50% | 29% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 33 | SCHWARY Irv | 12% | 37% | 37% | 13% | 1% | - | |
| 34 | SATTERWHITE William W. | 35% | 43% | 19% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 35 | CAAMANO Leo P. | 65% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 36 | DYER CJ | - | < 1% | 3% | 13% | 31% | 36% | 16% |
| 37 | KUHN Jeffrey | 3% | 30% | 41% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 38 | POMPIAN Mark | 49% | 41% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 38 | WEBER Dick | 3% | 20% | 37% | 28% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 40 | LIPTON Michael D. | 2% | 22% | 42% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 41 | GRAVIS Martin V. | 46% | 39% | 13% | 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.