Boston, MA - Boston, MA, 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 | ||
1 | LI Richard | - | - | - | 3% | 24% | 73% |
2 | KIM Tei D. | - | - | - | 4% | 29% | 66% |
3 | LEE Aidan | - | - | 1% | 11% | 38% | 50% |
3 | MARX Jackson L. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 34% |
5 | RUSADZE Nickolas | - | 1% | 6% | 27% | 43% | 23% |
5 | WU Alexander | - | 2% | 16% | 36% | 34% | 11% |
7 | LI Yao (Liam) | - | 3% | 22% | 43% | 27% | 5% |
8 | GU Andrew | - | 1% | 11% | 38% | 42% | 7% |
9 | HOOSHI Jayden C. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 37% | 54% |
10 | MIALL Steven A. | - | - | 2% | 15% | 44% | 39% |
11 | JIANG Owen | - | - | 1% | 12% | 41% | 46% |
12 | LI Eric | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 33% |
13 | ZHEN Ethan | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 34% | 10% |
14 | XU Jia Bao (Bowen) | - | - | 2% | 16% | 43% | 38% |
15 | WECHSLER Jacob | 4% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 9% | 1% |
16 | XU Andy P. | - | 4% | 21% | 39% | 29% | 7% |
17 | GRAHAM Roy J. | - | - | - | - | 12% | 87% |
18 | CHEN Kyle P. | 1% | 11% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 3% |
19 | LIN James G. | - | 2% | 19% | 43% | 30% | 6% |
20 | LIN Michael | 4% | 28% | 41% | 22% | 5% | - |
21 | GONG Benjamin | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 41% | 21% |
22 | AUGUSTINE Aaron A. | 1% | 11% | 33% | 38% | 15% | 2% |
23 | CATINO Brennen | - | - | 6% | 27% | 47% | 20% |
24 | YU Jason | - | - | 3% | 29% | 62% | 6% |
25 | LI Matthew | - | 14% | 37% | 34% | 13% | 2% |
26 | LEE Christopher T. | - | 3% | 19% | 40% | 30% | 8% |
27 | CHENG Ethan | 1% | 11% | 36% | 37% | 13% | 1% |
28 | TANG August L. | - | 1% | 11% | 36% | 40% | 12% |
29 | LEE Jacob J | 1% | 7% | 29% | 42% | 19% | 2% |
30 | TANG Alexander L. | 1% | 8% | 29% | 40% | 20% | 2% |
31 | LI Jinghua E. | 1% | 7% | 25% | 38% | 25% | 4% |
32 | LEWIS Akhil | 9% | 30% | 36% | 20% | 5% | - |
33 | WONG Jackson | 17% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - |
34 | SONG Austin | - | 6% | 27% | 43% | 21% | 3% |
35 | JURMAN Therin | - | 3% | 22% | 57% | 17% | - |
36 | LI Aaron | - | 2% | 14% | 37% | 38% | 8% |
37 | ZHANG Teddy | 16% | 44% | 32% | 7% | - | - |
38 | ZHANG Alex | 5% | 24% | 37% | 26% | 7% | 1% |
39 | XIANG Derrick | 2% | 13% | 35% | 36% | 14% | 1% |
40 | TANG Albert | 3% | 19% | 39% | 29% | 8% | 1% |
41 | LIU Derek | - | 2% | 15% | 37% | 36% | 10% |
42 | LEE Jonah | 9% | 30% | 37% | 19% | 4% | - |
43 | WANG Mason | 2% | 22% | 44% | 26% | 5% | - |
44 | ZHANG Aaron | 1% | 9% | 36% | 38% | 15% | 2% |
45 | SHAO Eric | 5% | 27% | 43% | 21% | 3% | - |
46 | LEE Brendan | 7% | 34% | 39% | 17% | 3% | - |
47 | LU Guanxun (James) | 1% | 7% | 26% | 39% | 24% | 3% |
48 | HUTH Trevor | - | 1% | 9% | 31% | 41% | 18% |
49 | HUA Aiden | 3% | 19% | 44% | 28% | 6% | - |
50 | LI Chenglang Ryan | 15% | 38% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - |
51 | XU Ethan | 5% | 29% | 41% | 20% | 4% | - |
52 | FANG Hanning | 2% | 16% | 34% | 33% | 13% | 2% |
53 | XU Xinhao ( Sonny) | 3% | 17% | 34% | 32% | 13% | 2% |
54 | GUO Justin | 1% | 24% | 42% | 26% | 7% | 1% |
54 | SHEN Mingxuan | 15% | 37% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - |
56 | SVERDLOV Seth | 12% | 34% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - |
57 | WANG Julang | 53% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
58 | ZHUANG Chuanxuan | 21% | 55% | 21% | 3% | - | - |
59 | TAN Aidan | 20% | 48% | 26% | 6% | - | - |
60 | HUANG Eythan | 13% | 46% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - |
61 | JIA Jing Yu | 55% | 38% | 7% | - | - | - |
62 | TANG Terry | 59% | 34% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
63 | XU Dinghui Ryan | 34% | 46% | 18% | 1% | - | - |
64 | ZHAO Adam | 47% | 39% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
65 | LI Allen | 46% | 41% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
66 | LIU Jeremiah | 14% | 43% | 38% | 6% | - | - |
67 | ZHU Raymond | 9% | 42% | 37% | 11% | 1% | - |
68 | LEE Eugene | 59% | 34% | 6% | - | - | - |
69 | ONIK Ari N. | 9% | 30% | 36% | 20% | 5% | - |
70 | ZHOU Lyon | 15% | 41% | 34% | 9% | 1% | - |
70 | JIANG Matthew | 6% | 37% | 40% | 15% | 2% | - |
72 | LEWIS Nikhil I. | 90% | 9% | - | - | - | - |
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.