Liontree Arena (RIMAC) @ UC San Diego - La Jolla, CA, 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 | BURKE Spencer W. | - | - | - | - | 2% | 20% | 78% |
| 2 | SIU Aiden | - | - | - | - | 5% | 32% | 62% |
| 3 | WOO Christian | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 42% | 42% |
| 3 | CHIN Julian S. | - | - | 2% | 15% | 43% | 39% | |
| 5 | CHENG Nathan | - | - | 2% | 15% | 42% | 41% | |
| 6 | HOBSON Aaron K. | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 40% | 17% | |
| 7 | MARTIN IV Elmer D. | - | - | 2% | 16% | 43% | 38% | |
| 8 | CANLAS Nathan | - | - | 1% | 10% | 41% | 48% | |
| 9 | DETERING Julian | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 50% | |
| 10 | LEUNG Chu Ming Aiden | - | 3% | 15% | 36% | 36% | 10% | |
| 11 | LE Jacob W. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 42% | 21% |
| 12 | LING Eddie | - | - | 5% | 22% | 42% | 29% | 3% |
| 13 | OH Jaden | - | 3% | 21% | 46% | 26% | 4% | |
| 14 | NICOLETTI Luca | - | - | 5% | 28% | 49% | 18% | |
| 15 | PONS Diego | 1% | 9% | 36% | 38% | 14% | 2% | |
| 16 | KIM Aiden | - | 3% | 19% | 40% | 29% | 8% | - |
| 17 | MUSHER Benjamin J. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 42% | 19% |
| 18 | SCHIENEMAN Valentine | 35% | 43% | 18% | 3% | < 1% | - | |
| 19 | LLIDO Soren | 1% | 7% | 26% | 40% | 23% | 4% | |
| 20 | MA Andrew | - | 1% | 9% | 31% | 43% | 16% | |
| 21 | PARK Sky | 2% | 15% | 35% | 33% | 13% | 2% | |
| 22 | WU Alber Y. | - | - | 4% | 21% | 40% | 29% | 7% |
| 23 | DERRICK Blake | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 40% | 20% | 3% |
| 24 | HUANG Jonathan | - | 2% | 17% | 39% | 32% | 10% | 1% |
| 25 | ZHOU Hao Kai (Kevin) | - | 5% | 23% | 40% | 26% | 6% | - |
| 26 | MORROW Brenden | - | - | 4% | 21% | 42% | 29% | 4% |
| 27 | FUKUDA Diego | - | 1% | 14% | 38% | 37% | 10% | |
| 28 | DINSAY Kristjan | - | - | 1% | 12% | 35% | 40% | 12% |
| 29 | LI Avery Peihong | - | 5% | 22% | 40% | 28% | 5% | |
| 30 | LE Jacob H. | 15% | 39% | 33% | 11% | 2% | - | |
| 31 | ZHANG Aaron | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 40% | 17% | 1% |
| 32 | YI William | 2% | 12% | 34% | 37% | 14% | 2% | |
| 33 | PARK Ryan | 3% | 20% | 39% | 29% | 8% | 1% | |
| 34 | PARK Rion | - | 1% | 18% | 40% | 31% | 9% | 1% |
| 35 | LI Matthew | - | - | 4% | 21% | 42% | 28% | 4% |
| 36 | CORTRIGHT Skipper | - | 3% | 19% | 41% | 30% | 7% | |
| 37 | LAM Nicolas | 1% | 12% | 39% | 35% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 38 | CHAN Connor | 14% | 41% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 38 | KIM Daniel Y. | 3% | 18% | 38% | 31% | 9% | 1% | |
| 40 | PINCHENG Yao | 11% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | |
| 41 | AGRAWAL Niki | 16% | 37% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 42 | REICHEL Ezra | 11% | 37% | 36% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 43 | CHOI Ethan | - | 5% | 33% | 40% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 44 | ADAMS Cedric | 1% | 21% | 42% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 45 | BORG Matthew | 5% | 26% | 42% | 22% | 4% | - | - |
| 46 | WONG Evan | 1% | 23% | 42% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 47 | FINNEY Lorenz | - | 5% | 21% | 38% | 29% | 7% | |
| 48 | ZHONG Maxwell | 40% | 47% | 12% | 1% | - | - | |
| 49 | ZHANG Jacob | 11% | 33% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 50 | CAJERO Luis | - | 3% | 15% | 35% | 34% | 13% | |
| 51 | TULYAG Azim | 13% | 40% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 52 | MA Bryant | 2% | 12% | 32% | 36% | 16% | 2% | |
| 53 | TSAY Jordan R. | 13% | 39% | 34% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 54 | KALAMAS Nikolas | 24% | 51% | 21% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 55 | CHANG Nathan | 41% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 56 | KUO Jayden | 37% | 54% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 57 | ORNELAS Matteo | 41% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | |
| 57 | KIM Jonah | 31% | 44% | 21% | 4% | - | - | |
| 59 | PARK David | 15% | 43% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | YORK Lucas | 32% | 50% | 16% | 2% | - | - | |
| 61 | LIANG Ethan | 51% | 45% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| 62 | TSOI Spencer | 33% | 45% | 19% | 2% | - | - | |
| 63 | DEJOURNETT Jacob | 89% | 10% | - | - | - | - | - |
| 64 | LI Gen | 47% | 42% | 10% | 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.