French Field House - Columbus, OH, 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 | VELTRUP Paul | - | 3% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 10% | 1% |
| 2 | MAZUR Daniil | - | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 39% | 20% |
| 3 | FEINBERG Gabriel M. | - | - | - | 5% | 23% | 44% | 28% |
| 3 | GIBSON Nowell L. | - | - | 2% | 11% | 33% | 42% | 12% |
| 5 | LI Jesse | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 8% |
| 6 | GARRETT Samuel | - | - | 1% | 15% | 48% | 32% | 3% |
| 7 | LANGE Henry C. | - | - | 2% | 15% | 44% | 40% | |
| 8 | DINKINS Ramadan | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 39% | 11% |
| 9 | ELSAYED Ahmed | - | - | - | - | 2% | 24% | 73% |
| 10 | BUELAU Matthew | - | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 37% | 14% |
| 11 | PARK Ian C. | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 6% |
| 12 | RODNEY Maxwell | - | - | 4% | 20% | 38% | 29% | 8% |
| 13 | SIVAKUMAR Ajit | - | - | 1% | 11% | 31% | 39% | 17% |
| 14 | VELINOV Gabriel | 1% | 9% | 32% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 15 | WOJCIECHOWSKI Matthew N. | - | 2% | 17% | 42% | 33% | 7% | |
| 16 | HEIM Bryce | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 17 | BOUMEDIENNE Sami | - | 4% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 2% |
| 18 | SHAH S Ayush | - | - | 1% | 7% | 32% | 44% | 17% |
| 19 | KOKENGE Clark | - | - | - | 7% | 39% | 46% | 7% |
| 20 | VARIN Georgii | - | 1% | 14% | 38% | 36% | 11% | |
| 21 | WEISS Miles J. | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 40% | 47% |
| 22 | CHAWLA Armaan | 1% | 10% | 25% | 33% | 22% | 7% | 1% |
| 23 | KING Cameron | - | 4% | 22% | 39% | 28% | 6% | - |
| 24 | SOMIR Avinash V. | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 6% |
| 25 | KENYON Jacob | - | 8% | 37% | 39% | 14% | 1% | |
| 26 | NDJEKA Jesse | - | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 41% | 29% |
| 27 | POHL Merik A. | - | 1% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 22% | 5% |
| 28 | LAVENSTEIN Kinley V. | - | - | 4% | 18% | 37% | 32% | 9% |
| 29 | HAW Keith F. | - | 7% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 30 | DINKINS Shuayb | 12% | 34% | 34% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
| 31 | KOKENGE Reid | 2% | 12% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
| 32 | SCHULTZ Alex | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 6% |
| 33 | CHU Ian | - | 3% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 34 | JOVANOVIC Jovan | - | - | 2% | 12% | 35% | 41% | 10% |
| 35 | MITTAL Sanil | 2% | 12% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 36 | VISURAKAPALLI Sathvik | - | 5% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
| 37 | BROOKS Zachary B. | - | 3% | 15% | 31% | 32% | 16% | 3% |
| 38 | PAN Tristan | 11% | 37% | 37% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 39 | MICKO Fritz K. | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 23% | 6% | - |
| 40 | BARTCH Ethan L. | 1% | 26% | 43% | 24% | 6% | - | - |
| 41 | SONN Rohan | - | 4% | 28% | 49% | 17% | 2% | - |
| 42 | SVIRINOVSKYI Illia | 1% | 12% | 32% | 34% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 43 | KUMAR Anitya | - | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 33% | 13% |
| 44 | WU Jimmy | 6% | 40% | 39% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 45 | KENYON Benjamin | 8% | 32% | 37% | 18% | 4% | 1% | - |
| 46 | GARBER Robert A. | 3% | 24% | 38% | 26% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 47 | BROMELL Thomas | - | 11% | 33% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 48 | PARCELEWICZ John M. | 13% | 46% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 49 | HU Evan | 9% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 50 | LI Chenyu | 10% | 58% | 27% | 4% | - | - | |
| 51 | CHOI Christian | 80% | 19% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 52 | WANG Elliott | 54% | 38% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
| 53 | MCEVOY Sean | 4% | 18% | 31% | 29% | 14% | 4% | - |
| 54 | CLARE Ryan | 46% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 55 | WANG Peilin | 18% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 56 | GOEL Raghav | 13% | 41% | 34% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 57 | ALTIER William | 14% | 44% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 58 | KIM Sebastian | 79% | 20% | 1% | - | - | - | |
| 59 | CHU Duong | 18% | 41% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | KRAJ Pawel | 22% | 40% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 61 | CHEN Jerry | 8% | 38% | 49% | 6% | - | - | - |
| 62 | GREENE Patrick | 89% | 10% | - | - | - | - | - |
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.