Catonsville, MD - Catonsville, MD, USA
Explore the pool victory probability density 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 | RACHTCHININE Alexandre | - | - | - | 5% | 27% | 45% | 22% |
| 2 | ROBERTS Samuel E. | 2% | 15% | 36% | 34% | 12% | 1% | |
| 3 | TRAN Dai Long | - | 1% | 6% | 19% | 34% | 30% | 10% |
| 3 | KROPP Jack | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 37% | 28% | 7% |
| 5 | SITBON-TAYLOR Noe B. | - | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 35% | 13% |
| 6 | DOAN Joseph M. | - | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 39% | 21% |
| 7 | SNYDER IV William B. | - | - | 1% | 11% | 38% | 50% | |
| 8 | MAZZOLI Julio C. | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 21% | |
| 9 | SCHWARTZ Elliott | - | - | 6% | 27% | 45% | 22% | |
| 10 | BAGHA Armin | 1% | 10% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 1% |
| 11 | O'HARA Keegan J. | - | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 36% | 16% |
| 12 | CHAWLA Armaan | 1% | 9% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 13 | HOFFMANN Christopher J. | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 39% | 47% |
| 14 | LEE Daniel Y. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 31% | 41% | 18% |
| 15 | WALTHER Bryan M. | - | 2% | 12% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 4% |
| 16 | HODGE Jaydon L. | 3% | 28% | 41% | 22% | 5% | - | |
| 17 | CHEN Wesley | - | 2% | 9% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 6% |
| 18 | ADLER Ethan M. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 7% |
| 19 | PARK Ian C. | - | 1% | 7% | 29% | 43% | 20% | |
| 20 | WOZNIAK Ignacy | 1% | 8% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 5% | |
| 21 | DUDLEY Logan M. | 18% | 37% | 30% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 22 | COMBS Colson | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 6% |
| 23 | SKEATE Jonathan F. | 8% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 7% | 1% | |
| 24 | RINEHART Conner M. | - | 2% | 15% | 39% | 35% | 10% | |
| 25 | RHYU Kozmo | - | - | 5% | 19% | 36% | 31% | 9% |
| 26 | LU Sebastian X. | 7% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 27 | TRIMMER Colin | - | 5% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 9% | 1% |
| 28 | KING Cameron | 1% | 7% | 22% | 32% | 26% | 10% | 2% |
| 29 | WU Byron | 1% | 6% | 25% | 40% | 24% | 4% | |
| 30 | HUGHES Michael D. | 31% | 55% | 13% | 1% | - | - | |
| 31 | GISLER Benjamin B. | 6% | 27% | 37% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 32 | CHAMBERS Thomas J. | 4% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 33 | DIETRICH Sam | - | 3% | 16% | 38% | 35% | 8% | - |
| 34 | KELLISH Jeffery L. | - | - | 3% | 15% | 37% | 37% | 8% |
| 35 | KUCZAJDA Matthew | 4% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 36 | LEE Shwan | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 35% | 20% | 4% |
| 37 | HALL Timothy | - | 5% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 12% | 2% |
| 38 | SIVAKUMAR Ajit | - | 2% | 15% | 38% | 33% | 11% | 1% |
| 39 | PICCUS Isaac S. | - | 5% | 24% | 40% | 25% | 4% | |
| 40 | PARK Prestan S. | 1% | 9% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 5% | |
| 41 | STUBBLEFIELD Alexander | 1% | 12% | 31% | 34% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 42 | EVANS Allen L. | - | 4% | 15% | 30% | 31% | 16% | 3% |
| 43 | HERMAN Nathan | 63% | 31% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 44 | PARK Vincent | - | 2% | 14% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% |
| 45 | SNYDER John W. | 7% | 30% | 39% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 46 | WRIGHT Max | 1% | 11% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
| 47 | LI Benjamin | 2% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 48 | GAMBINO Robert A. | 3% | 16% | 34% | 32% | 13% | 2% | |
| 49 | TATE Leon J. | 36% | 43% | 17% | 3% | - | - | |
| 50 | LU Qi | 15% | 40% | 33% | 11% | 2% | - | |
| 51 | SCHULZE Ethan | 8% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 52 | CAMMETT William J. | 30% | 45% | 21% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 53 | ROSENBERGER III Paul | 6% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 54 | WOHNER Kenneth S. | 13% | 38% | 36% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | MOORE Guy L. | 24% | 43% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 55 | MARSH Alex | 19% | 43% | 29% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 57 | HERNANDEZ Agustin | 13% | 37% | 36% | 13% | 1% | - | - |
| 58 | SMITH Steven | 12% | 41% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 59 | SAUNDERS Eric | 13% | 35% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 60 | FLORES Jonathan | 20% | 42% | 29% | 8% | 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.