Jump Beyond Sports - Torrance, 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 | SADOVSKY Leor B. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 79% |
| 2 | MARTIN IV Elmer D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 76% |
| 3 | OH Jaden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 81% | 31% |
| 3 | CHOI Ethan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 66% | 19% |
| 5 | NGUYEN Martin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 55% |
| 6 | SCHIENEMAN Valentine | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 58% | 21% | 2% |
| 7 | PARK Sky | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 53% | 11% |
| 8 | BIELER Mason | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 67% | 19% | 1% |
| 9 | PARK Ryan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 24% |
| 10 | PARK Steve (Sangmin) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 67% | 29% | 5% |
| 11 | YI William | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 24% |
| 12 | PINCHENG Yao | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 35% | 7% |
| 13 | DINSAY Kristjan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 86% | 43% |
| 14 | LING Carson Jr | 100% | 100% | 91% | 55% | 17% | 2% | - |
| 15 | LE Jacob H. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 48% | 16% | 2% |
| 16 | TONKOVICH Ryan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 70% | 32% | 6% |
| 17 | PARK David | 100% | 96% | 74% | 36% | 9% | 1% | < 1% |
| 18 | ZHOU Hao Kai (Kevin) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 62% | 8% |
| 19 | BAE Eugene | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 46% | 13% | 1% |
| 20 | CHANG Eric Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 54% | 14% | 1% |
| 21 | ZHANG Aaron | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 85% | 38% |
| 22 | KIM Aiden | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 33% | 7% |
| 23 | ZHOU Ryan | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 28% | 7% | 1% |
| 24 | WU Trevor | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 61% | 22% |
| 25 | ORNELAS Matteo | 100% | 100% | 96% | 66% | 26% | 5% | - |
| 26 | CHOI Ethan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 59% | 19% | 2% |
| 27 | CHEN Matthew | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 36% | 10% | 1% |
| 28 | CHANG Nathan | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 22% | 3% | - |
| 29 | ZHANG Jacob | 100% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 68% | 29% | 5% |
| 30 | TSAY Jordan R. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 44% | 12% | 1% |
| 31 | TSOI Spencer | 100% | 99% | 88% | 54% | 14% | 1% | - |
| 32 | ONG Nicholas | 100% | 97% | 76% | 41% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 33 | YANG Charles | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 33% | 6% |
| 34 | ZHONG Maxwell | 100% | 100% | 96% | 71% | 29% | 5% | - |
| 35 | PONTOPPIDAN Erik | 100% | 90% | 56% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 36 | DENG David | 100% | 98% | 85% | 54% | 19% | 3% | - |
| 37 | KIM Jonah | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 17% | 2% |
| 38 | HE Bourne | 100% | 94% | 66% | 25% | 4% | - | - |
| 39 | BORG Matthew | 100% | 99% | 89% | 60% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 40 | ZHAN Kevin | 100% | 94% | 70% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 41 | LIANG Ethan | 100% | 81% | 38% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 42 | ZHANG Andrew | 100% | 93% | 64% | 23% | 3% | - | - |
| 43 | FOY Grant | 100% | 76% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 44 | KUO Jayden | 100% | 61% | 19% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 45 | LEE Christopher | 100% | 74% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 46 | LEE Daniel | 100% | 89% | 52% | 16% | 2% | - | - |
| 47 | CHANG Jeremy | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 31% | 7% | - |
| 48 | COLLIGAN Apollo | 100% | 69% | 26% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 48 | TRUJILLO Jonah | 100% | 64% | 21% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 50 | FEDOR Lucian | 100% | 36% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| 51 | SHORTER David Alexander | 100% | 88% | 23% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 52 | FLANAGAN Miles | 100% | 91% | 61% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
| 53 | ROSE Jacob W. | 100% | 84% | 29% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 54 | DACKO Nolan | 100% | 49% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 54 | MCCARVILL Cooper | 100% | 85% | 45% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 56 | LI Brendan | 100% | 22% | 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.