Fort Worth, TX, 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 | ZHOU Chenqiao | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 92% | 42% |
2 | YANG Charles | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 50% |
3 | ZHAO Nathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 66% |
3 | HOU Gaven | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 78% | 44% | 12% |
5 | FUKUDA Brando | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 35% |
6 | MAZAHERI Fletcher | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 36% | 8% |
7 | JAZWINSKI Ryan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 15% |
8 | TANG Royce | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 52% | 15% | |
9 | DESERANNO Leander | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 60% |
10 | YU ShiYu (Henry) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 86% | 55% | 17% |
11 | ZHOU Shawn | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 40% | |
12 | WANG Tiger | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 25% | |
13 | CHEN Hanson | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 56% |
14 | YU ShiLin (Harry) | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 15% | 1% |
15 | XIE Jayden | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 77% | 39% | 6% |
16 | LEE Jaehee | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 33% |
17 | PLUMMER Waylon | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 15% | |
18 | GE Felix Fei | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 25% | 4% |
19 | CHANG Jeremy | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 17% |
20 | HUANG Jinyao | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 45% | 11% | |
21 | SHAW eric | 100% | 100% | 97% | 76% | 38% | 9% | 1% |
22 | HONG Edwin | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 29% | 6% | - |
23 | GRIGORIEV Michael | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 42% | 11% |
23 | LIM EUNSEONG | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 32% | 5% |
25 | KUANG Cyrus | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 55% | 20% | 2% |
26 | KIAYIAS Alexander | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 26% | 5% | - |
27 | YOU Alan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 65% | 19% | |
28 | QU Zhida (richard) | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 25% | |
29 | LU Hansen | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 21% | 2% |
30 | ZHAI Alex | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 4% | - |
31 | ALANAZI Saif | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 35% | 10% | 1% |
32 | WANG Elijah (QiChen) | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 4% | - |
33 | DANTON Ryan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 34% | 5% |
34 | REN Ryan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 86% | 55% | 18% |
35 | CZARNECKI Thomas | 100% | 99% | 88% | 55% | 19% | 3% | |
36 | RAU Shogun | 100% | 100% | 94% | 70% | 31% | 5% | |
37 | YANG Steve | 100% | 99% | 92% | 63% | 22% | 3% | |
38 | TSUI Raedyn Ho Hin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 41% | 9% |
39 | CHEN Jason | 100% | 100% | 94% | 75% | 41% | 13% | 2% |
40 | CHEN Ryker | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 52% | 16% | 1% |
40 | RAMKUMAR Eeshan | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 28% | 6% | - |
42 | HUYNH Matthew | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 18% | 2% |
43 | ZENG Albert | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
44 | WATERFIELD Lysander | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 16% | |
45 | KO Darren | 100% | 97% | 77% | 39% | 10% | 1% | |
46 | HE Ian | 100% | 100% | 93% | 67% | 28% | 6% | - |
47 | CHOI Hunter | 100% | 99% | 89% | 43% | 10% | 1% | - |
48 | YANG Tate | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 49% | 18% | 3% |
49 | ALVAREZ Francisco Janusz | 100% | 74% | 32% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
50 | AMR HOSSNY Adam | 100% | 98% | 85% | 50% | 16% | 3% | - |
51 | KIM Gene | 100% | 99% | 89% | 62% | 28% | 6% | - |
52 | KIAYIAS Anthony | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 19% | 4% | - |
53 | WU Wallace | 100% | 99% | 88% | 57% | 21% | 3% | |
54 | QIAN Henry | 100% | 99% | 92% | 65% | 27% | 5% | |
55 | MAZAHERI Theodore | 100% | 81% | 37% | 8% | 1% | - | |
56 | ZHANG Aiden | 100% | 87% | 53% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
57 | YAN Rian | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 57% | 23% | 4% |
58 | QIAN Zekai | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 50% | 18% | 3% |
59 | FOO Kingston | 100% | 82% | 44% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
60 | YE Jerry | 100% | 94% | 67% | 29% | 6% | 1% | |
61 | ZHAO Jason | 100% | 97% | 79% | 40% | 10% | 1% | |
62 | PARK Andrew | 100% | 87% | 52% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
63 | JIN Xuechong Daniel | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 43% | 11% | 1% |
64 | TSUI Kaylan Ho Sen | 100% | 94% | 69% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
65 | HUA Isaac | 100% | 60% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
66 | CHANG Parker | 100% | 98% | 87% | 54% | 19% | 3% | - |
67 | WU Gengze | 100% | 86% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
68 | JIN Xueyuan George | 100% | 99% | 80% | 43% | 12% | 1% | |
69 | SUAREZ Lucas | 100% | 98% | 87% | 59% | 25% | 5% | - |
70 | SHARMA Ari | 100% | 86% | 49% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
71 | VALENCIA Beryn | 100% | 100% | 94% | 73% | 36% | 9% | 1% |
72 | LIN George | 100% | 100% | 98% | 78% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
73 | BERCEN Eli | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 53% | 15% | 1% |
74 | WILSON Jacob | 100% | 62% | 19% | 3% | - | - | |
75 | LEE Joshua | 100% | 96% | 73% | 30% | 5% | - | |
76 | LI Jayden | 100% | 85% | 46% | 13% | 2% | - | |
77 | SLAIN Owen | 100% | 90% | 60% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
78 | LU Baisu | 100% | 94% | 71% | 34% | 9% | 1% | - |
79 | WU James | 100% | 50% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
80 | HOARE Gabriel | 100% | 86% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
81 | HWANG Jayden | 100% | 86% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
82 | TEOH Liam | 100% | 59% | 18% | 3% | - | - | - |
83 | LEE Leo | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 35% | 10% | 1% |
84 | HWANG Jacob | 100% | 67% | 23% | 4% | - | - | |
85 | MAZAHERI John | 100% | 84% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
86 | FUNG Tiberias | 100% | 55% | 15% | 2% | - | - | |
86 | PARK Avan | 100% | 26% | 3% | - | - | - | |
88 | PAYNE Lynas | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 23% | 4% | - |
89 | MO Andy | 100% | 72% | 16% | 1% | - | - | - |
90 | MARTIRE Francis | 100% | 74% | 25% | 4% | - | - | - |
90 | ZHONG Albert | 100% | 74% | 34% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
92 | GOVSHTEYN Ari | 100% | 87% | 42% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
92 | MO Shawn | 100% | 77% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
94 | LI Alexander | 100% | 88% | 56% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
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.