Suffern, NY - Suffern, NY, 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 | KIM Minwook | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 46% | |
| 2 | KIM Avery J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 82% | 36% | |
| 3 | CHIEN Phillip L. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 22% | |
| 3 | TAKEMARU Leo | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 25% |
| 5 | LILOV Neil | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 47% |
| 6 | CHAN Matthew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 67% | 19% | |
| 7 | BASALYGA Jeffrey | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 53% | 15% |
| 8 | LASORSA Matthew | 100% | 99% | 93% | 74% | 43% | 16% | 2% |
| 9 | LEVIN Mark A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 68% | 29% | 5% |
| 10 | LIN William | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 31% | 6% |
| 11 | VAULES Charles W. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 46% | 12% |
| 12 | YAO Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 14% |
| 12 | PARK Collin D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 19% |
| 14 | QUAN Nicholas | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 17% | |
| 15 | BOHRA Rohan | 100% | 99% | 92% | 62% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 16 | GHOSH Tuhin | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 33% | 7% | |
| 17 | GANTA Vijay | 100% | 95% | 67% | 27% | 6% | 1% | < 1% |
| 18 | MOSKOWITZ Mason C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 27% | |
| 19 | LAU Jeremy Y. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 48% | 16% | 2% |
| 20 | CHO Brandon | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 45% | 17% | 3% |
| 21 | LUO ZiRui | 100% | 99% | 88% | 57% | 21% | 3% | |
| 22 | KEEFE Duncan | 100% | 96% | 76% | 38% | 10% | 1% | |
| 23 | MURTHY Mukund | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 40% | 9% | |
| 24 | CHAN Daniel | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 42% | 7% | - |
| 25 | KIM-COGAN Ryan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 30% | 6% |
| 26 | GILLIGAN Wolff | 100% | 97% | 84% | 56% | 25% | 6% | 1% |
| 27 | HUANG Ethan F. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 32% | 6% |
| 28 | YUAN Kevin | 100% | 98% | 86% | 51% | 14% | 1% | |
| 29 | WONG Ryan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 45% | 11% |
| 30 | EPSTEIN Henry N. | 100% | 87% | 52% | 18% | 3% | - | |
| 31 | D'ORAZIO Joseph | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 51% | 15% | |
| 32 | WU Wilmund | 100% | 82% | 42% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 33 | HO Kaden M. | 100% | 78% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 34 | GINIS Nathan | 100% | 100% | 96% | 83% | 56% | 24% | 5% |
| 35 | SMITH David C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 43% | 10% |
| 36 | RYAN Edward T. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 75% | 44% | 16% | 3% |
| 37 | HAN Daniel Y. | 100% | 88% | 46% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 38 | CHERNAEV Aleksandar | 100% | 97% | 76% | 34% | 7% | 1% | |
| 39 | SPOSATO Andrew P. | 100% | 85% | 43% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 40 | CHAUDHURI Eeshaan A. | 100% | 98% | 82% | 43% | 8% | 1% | |
| 41 | TEVEBAUGH Andrew | 100% | 95% | 73% | 35% | 8% | - | |
| 42 | LIU Kelly | 100% | 96% | 80% | 49% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 43 | BOURGHOL Matthew | 100% | 97% | 78% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 44 | GOLD Jackson | 100% | 97% | 78% | 41% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 45 | DEWEY Charles J. | 100% | 82% | 40% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 46 | LEE Jude H. | 100% | 90% | 58% | 22% | 4% | - | |
| 47 | KOGAN Benjamin | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 48% | 16% | 2% |
| 48 | SANDERS Samuel B. | 100% | 94% | 62% | 20% | 3% | - | - |
| 49 | GEORGE Daniel | 100% | 56% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 50 | BURDAN Gabriel | 100% | 99% | 90% | 57% | 15% | 1% | - |
| 51 | DUNAL Daniel | 100% | 66% | 19% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 52 | MOULTON Ian | 100% | 73% | 26% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 53 | HUANG Tyler T. | 100% | 91% | 58% | 19% | 2% | - | |
| 54 | PENTLAND Craig | 100% | 70% | 26% | 5% | - | - | |
| 55 | LIN Stephen | 100% | 51% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 55 | GARCIA Ryan | 100% | 94% | 66% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 57 | HONG Justin | 100% | 45% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 58 | HONG Vincent Q. | 100% | 83% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 59 | ALTIRS Alexander | 100% | 94% | 72% | 39% | 14% | 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.