Ontario Convention Center - Hall A & B - Ontario, 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 | NICOLETTI Luca | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 57% |
| 2 | SOTO-ULEV Aden A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 22% | |
| 3 | DERRICK Blake | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 48% |
| 3 | LO Preston | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 26% |
| 5 | FUKUDA Diego | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 36% |
| 6 | WU Alber Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 52% |
| 7 | NGUYEN Martin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 32% |
| 8 | MORROW Brenden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 63% | 23% |
| 9 | RASMUSSEN Sage | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 28% |
| 10 | LI Samuel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 66% | 22% | |
| 11 | ZHANG Aaron | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 54% |
| 12 | DINSAY Kristjan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 76% |
| 13 | KETTELLE John | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 15% |
| 14 | PONS Diego | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 68% | 23% | |
| 15 | CHEN Hanson | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 33% | 6% |
| 16 | YU Jason | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 51% | |
| 17 | LING Eddie | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 60% |
| 18 | CHEN Charlie Tian-You | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 63% |
| 19 | YANG Charles | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 34% | 6% |
| 20 | BIELER Mason | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 27% | 6% | 1% |
| 21 | LIU Zixian (Aaron) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 51% | 10% |
| 22 | CAJERO Luis O. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 47% |
| 23 | LEE Jayden J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 33% | 3% |
| 24 | ZHANG Jacob | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 34% | 5% |
| 25 | LE Jacob H. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 60% | 23% | 3% |
| 25 | PINCHENG Yao | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 71% | 36% | 8% |
| 27 | OROPEZA David | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 53% | 15% |
| 28 | NAVARRO Kato | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 30% | 4% |
| 29 | ZHANG Matthew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 29% | 5% |
| 30 | FUKUDA Brando | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 54% | 17% | 2% |
| 31 | TALASILA Arush | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 38% | 6% | |
| 32 | RAUTUREAU Arthur | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 21% | 2% | |
| 33 | HUANG Jonathan | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 28% | 5% | |
| 34 | CHUANG Oscar | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 26% | 4% |
| 35 | PARK William | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 26% | 5% | - |
| 36 | WONG Evan | 100% | 100% | 94% | 73% | 36% | 8% | |
| 37 | WONG Yuheng Isaac | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 47% | 16% | 2% |
| 38 | PARK Rion | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 63% | 27% | 5% |
| 39 | NGAI Julian | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 20% | 2% |
| 40 | LI Toby | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 52% | 12% |
| 41 | TSAY Jordan R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 63% | 23% | 2% |
| 42 | RAUTUREAU Hugo | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 52% | 19% | 3% |
| 43 | ZHONG Maxwell | 100% | 84% | 46% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 43 | PARK David | 100% | 96% | 75% | 39% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 45 | CHANG Jeremy | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 46% | 15% | 2% |
| 46 | CHANG Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 22% | 2% |
| 47 | GORDON William L. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 31% | 8% | 1% |
| 48 | SISINNI Leonardo | 100% | 91% | 63% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 49 | SAH Steven | 100% | 99% | 86% | 55% | 20% | 3% | |
| 50 | AGRAWAL Niki | 100% | 100% | 97% | 73% | 30% | 5% | |
| 51 | XIE Buster | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 38% | 5% |
| 52 | LIU William | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 56% | 20% | 3% |
| 53 | LI Edison M. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 69% | 33% | 8% | 1% |
| 54 | LAM Nicolas | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 23% | 3% |
| 55 | RYOU Andy | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 62% | 26% | 4% |
| 56 | ZHANG Graham | 100% | 99% | 88% | 56% | 19% | 3% | - |
| 57 | CHEN Matthew | 100% | 80% | 38% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 58 | CHOI Ethan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 48% | 13% | |
| 59 | ROZALSKI Eli | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
| 60 | ZHANG Raphael | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 61 | LEE JISUNG | 100% | 93% | 67% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 62 | LEE SIYUN | 100% | 90% | 54% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 63 | FLANAGAN Miles | 100% | 87% | 52% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 64 | ORNELAS Matteo | 100% | 86% | 51% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 65 | RODRIGUEZ Tyler | 100% | 96% | 75% | 37% | 9% | 1% | |
| 66 | BAE Eugene | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 44% | 11% | 1% |
| 67 | ZHOU Ryan | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 17% | 1% |
| 68 | KIM Jonah | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
| 69 | DENG David | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
| 70 | SEIGEL Duncan | 100% | 97% | 81% | 45% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 71 | CHOI Ethan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 55% | 22% | 3% |
| 72 | TULYAG Azim | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 27% | 5% | |
| 73 | LU Kevin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 23% | |
| 74 | ZHOU Shawn | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 56% | 17% | 2% |
| 75 | PARK Steve (Sangmin) | 100% | 100% | 96% | 82% | 52% | 19% | 3% |
| 76 | CHAN Joseph | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 18% | 2% |
| 77 | KIM Andrew | 100% | 67% | 24% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 78 | HUANG Nathan | 100% | 92% | 57% | 17% | 2% | - | - |
| 79 | NISHIHIRA Tyler | 100% | 70% | 26% | 5% | - | - | |
| 80 | KIM Daniel Y. | 100% | 98% | 85% | 51% | 17% | 2% | |
| 81 | ZHANG Lucas | 100% | 100% | 97% | 68% | 25% | 4% | |
| 82 | ZHAN Kevin | 100% | 92% | 60% | 23% | 4% | - | |
| 83 | YU ZiRun (Kinton) | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 53% | 20% | 3% |
| 84 | CHANG Nathan | 100% | 95% | 67% | 28% | 5% | - | - |
| 85 | CHANG Eric Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
| 86 | CHOI Benjamin | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 38% | 9% | 1% |
| 87 | TSOI Spencer | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 88 | LI Gen | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 33% | 8% | 1% |
| 89 | ZHANG Andrew | 100% | 83% | 44% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 90 | ZHANG Jayden | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 19% | 3% | - |
| 90 | CHUN Dashel | 100% | 97% | 78% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 92 | PONTOPPIDAN Erik | 100% | 96% | 71% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 93 | YOU Alan | 100% | 93% | 67% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 94 | SHORTER David Alexander | 100% | 85% | 45% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
| 95 | LING Carson Jr | 100% | 87% | 49% | 15% | 2% | - | |
| 95 | HOU Xiaolin (Kobe) | 100% | 84% | 23% | 3% | - | - | |
| 97 | KULKARNI Karan | 100% | 79% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 98 | LEE Euan | 100% | 86% | 47% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
| 99 | DANIEL Nikith | 100% | 92% | 57% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 100 | LOZANO Veyron Jericho | 100% | 99% | 88% | 59% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 101 | WONG Braxton | 100% | 95% | 68% | 28% | 6% | - | - |
| 102 | WU Thomas | 100% | 90% | 53% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 103 | FOY Grant | 100% | 61% | 18% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 103 | LEE Daniel | 100% | 90% | 52% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 105 | PE Noah | 100% | 95% | 72% | 37% | 11% | 1% | - |
| 105 | MITCHELL Max | 100% | 89% | 55% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 107 | DULAI Agam | 100% | 70% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 108 | GALLO Michael | 100% | 77% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 109 | LEE Mason | 100% | 81% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 110 | UPENDER West | 100% | 92% | 61% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
| 111 | MONTGOMERY Georgie | 100% | 81% | 41% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 112 | LIANG Ethan | 100% | 57% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 113 | PETROV Mikhail | 100% | 61% | 19% | 3% | - | - | |
| 114 | BOYNTON Alex | 100% | 25% | - | - | - | - | |
| 115 | LI Richard | 100% | 73% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 116 | MANIKTALA Suvir | 100% | 83% | 47% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 117 | GUO Joey | 100% | 84% | 44% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 117 | BANUELOS Dario | 100% | 55% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 119 | MA Oliver | 100% | 95% | 55% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 120 | DEJOURNETT Jacob | 100% | 53% | 13% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 121 | HE Bourne | 100% | 75% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 121 | JACOB Ezra | 100% | 94% | 71% | 35% | 10% | 2% | - |
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.