Baltimore, MD - Baltimore, MD, 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 | ALLEN Graham | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 38% | 9% |
| 2 | PICCUS Isaac S. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 29% | 6% |
| 3 | RITCHIE Patrick Q. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 35% | 8% |
| 3 | ZHANG Tianyi | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 25% | 5% |
| 5 | PARTRIDGE Lucas F. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 61% | 26% | 5% |
| 6 | LABROZZI Aidan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 38% | 9% |
| 7 | HU Andre B. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 86% | 59% | 26% | 5% |
| 8 | XIAN Ryan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 39% | 10% |
| 9 | WHITEHURST JJ | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 42% | 10% |
| 10 | HODGE Jaydon L. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 30% | 7% | 1% |
| 11 | ADLER Ethan M. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 33% | 7% |
| 12 | SCHAEFER Joshua M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 44% | 11% |
| 13 | LAWRENCE Brendan D. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 14% | 1% |
| 14 | STUBBLEFIELD Alexander | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 38% | 9% |
| 15 | CHAWLA Armaan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 35% | 8% |
| 16 | GUMAGAY Paul | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 15% |
| 17 | LI Jeffrey | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 46% | 12% |
| 18 | MARKAS Justin W. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 53% | 16% |
| 19 | BADIOLI Carlo | 100% | 96% | 75% | 39% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 20 | LI Jeffrey | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 26% | 5% |
| 21 | O'BRIEN Timothy S. | 100% | 77% | 32% | 5% | < 1% | - | - |
| 22 | KIM Minjun | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 48% | 16% | 2% |
| 23 | KANACH Duncan | 100% | 78% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 24 | LU Sebastian X. | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 25 | DEL CASTILLO Matthew Raymond M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 68% | 27% | 4% |
| 26 | KIM Dohyun D. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 57% | 20% | 2% |
| 27 | GRENKE Brad | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 25% |
| 28 | HOU Phi | 100% | 98% | 83% | 50% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 29 | ZHENG Brian | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 31% | 6% |
| 30 | STEVENS Daniel | 100% | 97% | 78% | 45% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 31 | HU Alexander W. | 100% | 93% | 69% | 34% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 32 | LIU John | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 22% | 4% |
| 33 | KENNEDY Kyle J. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 28% | 6% | - |
| 34 | RITCHIE Mark T. | 100% | 92% | 65% | 31% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 35 | KIRSCH Adam J. | 100% | 90% | 54% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 36 | HABIB III David P. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 24% | 5% | - |
| 38 | KUHN Jeffrey | 100% | 85% | 47% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 39 | WHITELOCK James R. | 100% | 88% | 56% | 22% | 5% | - | - |
| 40 | TUCKER Owen J. | 100% | 96% | 79% | 45% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 41 | OH Justin | 100% | 90% | 61% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 41 | WIEDE Gerd | 100% | 89% | 52% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 43 | GILLESPIE Jeremy W. | 100% | 61% | 20% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 44 | HOFFMAN Shane C. | 100% | 91% | 61% | 25% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 45 | LU Qi | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 46 | OBERLEITON Timothy | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 47 | TATE Leon J. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 62% | 28% | 6% | 1% |
| 48 | AKOCS Ethan | 100% | 66% | 24% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 49 | AKOCS Tony | 100% | 90% | 60% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
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.