Mission Fencing Center - Rocky Point, NY, 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 | GAO Daniel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 53% | 15% |
2 | COLLYMORE Spencer T. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 28% | |
3 | ROLLO Emmett H. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 74% | 38% | 10% | 1% |
3 | WU Joseph | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 42% |
5 | WU Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 21% |
6 | PRIHODKO Max | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 65% | 31% | 7% |
7 | KANG Michael H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 33% | |
8 | KNOX James | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 20% | |
9 | DOLMETSCH Max | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 62% | 20% |
10 | WOLFE Alex | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 49% | 12% | |
11 | CAI Brian | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 20% | |
12 | LEHR William D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 48% | 10% |
13 | OH Kevin Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 45% | 9% |
14 | JIN Owen | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 49% |
15 | MEN Junda | 100% | 73% | 28% | 6% | - | - | |
16 | SIMPSON Patrick | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 23% | 3% | |
17 | THAKUR Om S. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 25% | 4% | |
18 | DEPOMMIER Remi | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 36% | 7% |
19 | ZOU Xianyang (Max) | 100% | 98% | 84% | 49% | 14% | 2% | - |
20 | SKAALAND Will | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 20% | 3% |
21 | SHA Michael | 100% | 99% | 87% | 51% | 15% | 2% | |
22 | NIXON Christian A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 28% | |
23 | GALLANT Antoine | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 74% | 29% |
24 | LAI Aedin | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 55% | 23% | 4% |
25 | SAVORETTI Francesco | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 39% | 7% |
26 | BAILEY David | 100% | 96% | 77% | 44% | 15% | 3% | - |
27 | ZUKOFSKY Zachary | 100% | 98% | 85% | 50% | 15% | 2% | |
28 | JACKSON Nicholas | 100% | 57% | 14% | 2% | - | - | |
29 | NABAVI Matthew R. | 100% | 98% | 86% | 53% | 17% | 2% | |
30 | LIOU Solomon | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 46% | 11% | |
31 | LAI Boden | 100% | 94% | 68% | 29% | 6% | - | |
32 | O'HARROW Tristan C. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 40% | 13% | 2% |
33 | RICCOBONO Matthew | 100% | 73% | 30% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
34 | OSTIGUY Cameron | 100% | 93% | 63% | 24% | 4% | - | |
35 | ZAYDMAN Ethan | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 44% | 15% | 2% |
36 | JONELEIT Aidan | 100% | 88% | 55% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
37 | CHU Brandon A. | 100% | 97% | 78% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - |
38 | MAO Benjamin | 100% | 100% | 93% | 67% | 29% | 5% | |
39 | WU COLIN | 100% | 81% | 34% | 7% | 1% | - | |
40 | LONGSTREET Jeffrey | 100% | 100% | 94% | 70% | 31% | 6% | |
41 | HU Robert J. | 100% | 77% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - | |
42 | SAVORETTI Pietro | 100% | 93% | 59% | 22% | 4% | - | |
43 | CORRIDON Jack T. | 100% | 66% | 24% | 4% | - | - | |
44 | ROBINS Brennan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 34% | 7% | - |
44 | ZHANG ethan | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 30% | 6% | - |
46 | XIE Brandon | 100% | 97% | 78% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - |
47 | MAGIDSON Gabriel | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 18% | 3% |
48 | REPIC Oliver | 100% | 93% | 61% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
49 | DEITZ Ethan | 100% | 94% | 71% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - |
50 | BEALS Alden | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 27% | 5% | - |
51 | HERZ Alexander S. | 100% | 94% | 68% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - |
52 | HENRY Gevaughn | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 49% | 13% | |
53 | WONG King-Yee | 100% | 91% | 59% | 21% | 3% | - | - |
54 | BENTAHA Averroes | 100% | 62% | 19% | 3% | - | - | - |
55 | OKUN Benjamin | 100% | 71% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
56 | ZHANG Roland | 100% | 46% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
57 | GARCIA-CABRERA Jeffrey | 100% | 66% | 23% | 4% | - | - | - |
58 | MANITT Philip | 100% | 69% | 23% | 3% | - | - | - |
59 | BAKER Robert | 100% | 83% | 37% | 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.