The Fencing Center - San Jose, 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 | SISINNI Riccardo | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 55% |
| 2 | MA Andrew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 40% |
| 3 | MYERS Dean | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 45% | |
| 3 | LI Matthew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 21% | |
| 5 | NICOLETTI Luca | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% |
| 6 | AGRAWAL Niki | 100% | 100% | 97% | 76% | 37% | 8% | 1% |
| 7 | SOTO-ULEV Aden A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 29% | |
| 8 | SMITH Grant D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 29% | 4% |
| 9 | SETLUR Bhrugu | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 75% | 26% | |
| 10 | EDISON Ansel | 100% | 100% | 97% | 75% | 28% | 3% | |
| 11 | PARK Rion | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 55% | 20% | 3% |
| 12 | CORTRIGHT Skipper | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 20% | |
| 13 | MORROW Brenden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% | |
| 14 | WU Lucas | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 80% | 34% | |
| 15 | RASMUSSEN Sage | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 82% | 43% | 8% |
| 16 | WU Alber Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 73% | 23% | |
| 17 | PARK Sky | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 37% | 7% | |
| 18 | DERRICK Blake | 100% | 100% | 99% | 85% | 48% | 12% | |
| 19 | CORTRIGHT Joshua C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 63% | 17% |
| 20 | LO Preston | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 51% | 14% |
| 21 | TUAN Evan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 29% | 5% |
| 22 | REICHEL Ezra | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 36% | 8% | - |
| 23 | TONKOVICH Ryan | 100% | 99% | 88% | 57% | 19% | 2% | |
| 24 | ZHOU Ryan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 54% | 13% | 1% | |
| 25 | KIM Daniel Y. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 24% | 3% | |
| 26 | GETSIN Anthony | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 37% | 7% | |
| 27 | LAM Nicolas | 100% | 92% | 61% | 22% | 4% | - | |
| 28 | WONG Evan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
| 29 | BAEK David | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 17% |
| 30 | CHAN Connor | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 28% | 6% | - |
| 31 | TEH Ryan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 53% | 13% |
| 32 | LIU Andrew | 100% | 96% | 76% | 41% | 12% | 2% | |
| 33 | PINCHENG Yao | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 62% | 21% | 2% |
| 34 | HIRAMOTO Satoshi | 100% | 98% | 84% | 51% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 35 | KIM Jonah | 100% | 91% | 57% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 36 | GREENEBAUM Oliver | 100% | 99% | 85% | 48% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 37 | SAH Steven | 100% | 94% | 69% | 31% | 7% | - | |
| 38 | TSAY Jordan R. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 74% | 27% | 3% | |
| 39 | ZHANG Graham | 100% | 96% | 70% | 23% | 3% | - | |
| 40 | TOYOFUKU Ethan | 100% | 89% | 47% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 41 | KROVIDI Arush | 100% | 97% | 62% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
| 42 | JIANG Yehong | 100% | 86% | 40% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 43 | HE Bourne | 100% | 79% | 29% | 4% | - | - | |
| 44 | LUI Justin | 100% | 70% | 12% | 1% | - | - | |
| 45 | NG Andrew | 100% | 88% | 47% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 46 | PETERSON Lucas | 100% | 72% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 47 | NGAI Julian | 100% | 95% | 69% | 29% | 6% | - | |
| 48 | LEHTINEN Axel | 100% | 67% | 19% | 2% | - | - | |
| 49 | NISHIHIRA Tyler | 100% | 98% | 74% | 28% | 5% | - | - |
| 50 | LIANG Ethan | 100% | 44% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
| 51 | COONAN Seamus | 100% | 56% | 12% | 1% | - | - | |
| 52 | GORDON William L. | 100% | 90% | 57% | 21% | 4% | - | |
| 53 | AUYEUNG Isaac | 100% | 97% | 75% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 54 | KALAMAS Nikolas | 100% | 62% | 19% | 3% | - | - | |
| 55 | PETROV Mikhail | 100% | 62% | 20% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 56 | BOYNTON Alex | 100% | 40% | 2% | - | - | - | |
| 57 | WILLEY Emerson | 100% | 47% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 58 | GUPTA Tarush | 100% | 19% | 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.