San Jose, CA - 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 | XU William | 100% | 99% | 88% | 58% | 23% | 4% | |
| 2 | TANN Justin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 7% |
| 3 | JIANG Anthony | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 76% | 31% | |
| 3 | GHAYALOD ansh | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 57% | 15% | |
| 5 | YANG Duncan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 66% | 24% | |
| 6 | HOUTZ Jackson | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 46% | 13% |
| 7 | YUN Jake | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 73% | 28% | |
| 8 | FOX Nicholas | 100% | 100% | 94% | 73% | 38% | 11% | 1% |
| 9 | ZUBATIY Samuel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 45% |
| 10 | OVERDECK Andrew | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 38% | 10% | 1% |
| 11 | LIU Christopher X. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 76% | 25% |
| 12 | AVAKIAN Alec | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 48% | 11% | |
| 13 | ROSBERG Dashiell W. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 18% | |
| 14 | LEE Conner M. | 100% | 98% | 84% | 50% | 17% | 2% | |
| 15 | POFF James | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 16 | LUO George F. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 17% | |
| 17 | LEUNG cameron | 100% | 99% | 88% | 50% | 14% | 1% | |
| 18 | JEFFRY Christian B. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 61% | 20% |
| 19 | XU Andrew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 23% |
| 20 | VO Minh Q. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 35% | 9% | 1% |
| 20 | LO Konnor | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 64% | 29% | 6% |
| 20 | STONE Esmond A. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 18% | 3% |
| 23 | HOLZ William A. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 48% | 17% | 2% |
| 24 | SCOVILL Tenzin S. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 59% | 21% | 3% | |
| 25 | KIM Ryan | 100% | 98% | 82% | 45% | 12% | 1% | - |
| 26 | HAQ Omar M. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 36% | 7% | |
| 27 | BELLEMIN Thomas | 100% | 95% | 67% | 24% | 4% | - | |
| 28 | GAO Marcus | 100% | 82% | 35% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 29 | LIN Daniel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 47% | 13% |
| 30 | LEWALLEN Reece | 100% | 73% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 31 | GIANETTO Ethan K. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 42% | 10% | |
| 32 | LEE Christopher M. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 33% | 6% | |
| 33 | RHEE Ethan N. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 50% | 13% | |
| 34 | GARDNER Gabriel | 100% | 97% | 78% | 41% | 12% | 1% | |
| 35 | LEE Derek J. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 51% | 13% | 1% |
| 36 | JONES Daniel | 100% | 88% | 51% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 37 | MILLER-MORTON Kahlo | 100% | 97% | 81% | 45% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 38 | KIBBAR Tomer L. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 27% | 5% |
| 39 | WANG YiLe(Justin) | 100% | 69% | 19% | 2% | - | - | |
| 40 | RAMANAN Jaisimh | 100% | 98% | 85% | 53% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 41 | RAO Adrit | 100% | 73% | 27% | 4% | - | - | |
| 42 | MIYASAKI-CASTRO Masanobu | 100% | 92% | 61% | 24% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 43 | KUMAR Sachit | 100% | 76% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 44 | SHANKWILER Christopher | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 30% | 6% |
| 45 | SEAL Maximus R. | 100% | 63% | 16% | 2% | - | - | |
| 46 | CHIN Avery | 100% | 52% | 14% | 2% | - | - | |
| 47 | FILER Joshua | 100% | 49% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
| 47 | OSENAR Sam | 100% | 71% | 24% | 3% | - | - | |
| 49 | RAMANAN Govind | 100% | 90% | 57% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 49 | ARNE Michael | 100% | 52% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 51 | JORGESON Charlie | 100% | 81% | 38% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 52 | FENG Zefan | 100% | 61% | 20% | 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.