Madison, NJ - Madison, NJ, 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 | GANTA Vijay | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 59% | 24% | 4% |
2 | BASALYGA Jeffrey | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 23% |
3 | MOSZCZYNSKI Adam | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 21% |
3 | KIM Minwook | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 38% |
5 | ZU Kevin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 52% | 15% |
6 | TRAVERS Samir T. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 17% |
7 | RAI Avin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 48% | 12% |
8 | SMITH David C. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 38% | 9% |
9 | YAO Jonathan | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 34% | 7% | |
10 | TAKEMARU Leo | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 49% | 14% |
11 | TRAVAGLIONE Conor D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 27% |
12 | ZHOU Miles | 100% | 96% | 77% | 43% | 13% | 2% | |
13 | BRAR Sanjeet | 100% | 100% | 96% | 72% | 30% | 6% | - |
14 | OWENS William | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 63% | 28% | 6% |
15 | MORRILL Justin | 100% | 98% | 87% | 59% | 26% | 6% | 1% |
16 | QUAN Nicholas | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 27% | 5% |
17 | MORRILL William | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 59% | 21% | 3% |
17 | LASORSA Matthew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 28% | 5% |
19 | CZYZEWSKI Konrad R. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 54% | 20% | 3% |
20 | CHAN Daniel | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 33% | 7% | |
21 | CHAMBERS Amir E. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 57% | 15% |
22 | SHI Andrew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 54% | 17% |
23 | MOSKOWITZ Mason C. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 64% | 29% | 6% |
24 | WILSON Jude | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 36% | 8% |
25 | HONG Vincent Q. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 18% | 4% | - |
26 | WUN William | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 15% | |
27 | WU Mengke | 100% | 95% | 72% | 35% | 9% | 1% | |
28 | YEN Preston | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 23% | 4% | |
29 | LIN William | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 62% | 26% | 5% |
30 | CHAN Matthew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 40% | 10% |
31 | CHON Taylor A. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 41% | 11% | 1% |
32 | MORREALE John | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 30% | 6% |
33 | TANG Brendan J. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 30% | 6% | |
34 | KEEFE Duncan | 100% | 99% | 92% | 65% | 28% | 6% | - |
35 | TOPF Karl B. | 100% | 98% | 82% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
36 | CHO Brandon | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 40% | 10% | |
37 | TANG Albert | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 20% | 4% | - |
38 | PARKHURST Jr Michael | 100% | 97% | 78% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - |
39 | HUANG Ethan F. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 44% | 14% | 2% |
40 | LEE Jude H. | 100% | 94% | 63% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
40 | WOLIN Zachary | 100% | 91% | 61% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
42 | MICHNA Colin P. | 100% | 95% | 72% | 37% | 11% | 2% | - |
42 | HU Andrew | 100% | 98% | 81% | 46% | 14% | 2% | - |
44 | EPSTEIN Henry N. | 100% | 88% | 57% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - |
45 | GOLD Jackson | 100% | 96% | 76% | 41% | 13% | 2% | - |
46 | XU William | 100% | 89% | 52% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
47 | KURTZFREILICH Jake A. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 66% | 27% | 5% | - |
48 | EDELMAN Seth A. | 100% | 65% | 24% | 5% | - | - | |
49 | BARTOLO Domenic V. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 34% | 7% | |
50 | XU Michael | 100% | 85% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | |
51 | CLAWSON Amzie | 100% | 94% | 68% | 28% | 6% | - | - |
52 | VAROQUA Tolby | 100% | 79% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
53 | ANGKATAVANICH Owen | 100% | 91% | 50% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
53 | TEVEBAUGH Andrew | 100% | 96% | 73% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - |
55 | SHAO Peter | 100% | 57% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
56 | ZATZ Ben Z. | 100% | 59% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - |
57 | HOEY-WASOW Henry | 100% | 89% | 57% | 22% | 5% | - | |
58 | HENWOOD PJ | 100% | 76% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
59 | HAQ Kamran R. | 100% | 64% | 21% | 4% | - | - | - |
59 | GRYCIUK Koby | 100% | 33% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
61 | LEUNG Andrew K. | 100% | 65% | 14% | 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.