La Jolla, CA - La Jolla, 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 | HADLER Benjamin N. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 53% |
| 2 | DIVITO Dylan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 35% |
| 3 | LEE Benjamin H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 58% |
| 3 | KIM Brandon J. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 24% | 3% | |
| 5 | HEER Damanjit S. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 23% | 2% |
| 6 | RANADIVE Rishi R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 53% |
| 7 | GIRALDO Pablo E. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 60% | 17% | |
| 8 | OH Samuel H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 48% | 9% |
| 9 | SOHN Christopher | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 54% |
| 10 | MOHAMMAD Abdulwahab | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 15% |
| 11 | ZENG Lucas H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 33% |
| 12 | FORTNER Lance R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 25% | 4% |
| 13 | ZHENG Alan H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 39% | 9% |
| 14 | CATLIN Adam | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 35% | 7% |
| 15 | KUMBLA Samarth | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 24% | |
| 16 | MORALES Ian N. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 76% | 35% | 8% | 1% |
| 17 | CHIN Jason Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 52% | 15% |
| 18 | PROUTY Nicholas C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 33% | |
| 19 | LEVY Jacob M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 60% | 20% |
| 20 | PAEK Alex J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 30% |
| 21 | THAI William | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 53% | 14% |
| 22 | LAO Scott E. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 28% | 5% | |
| 23 | SOTO Ulises G | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 35% | 8% |
| 24 | PETERS Nathan M. | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 39% | 10% | 1% |
| 25 | BURKE Spencer W. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 35% | 5% |
| 26 | AVRON Case B. | 100% | 95% | 71% | 35% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 27 | LAI Christopher W. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 31% | 7% | - |
| 28 | FUKUDA Alessio R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 40% | 9% |
| 29 | DAVIS Christopher M. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 28% | 7% | 1% |
| 30 | NGUYEN Nish | 100% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 66% | 26% | 4% |
| 31 | PATINO Yahir | 100% | 89% | 52% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 32 | CHENG Matthew S. | 100% | 93% | 64% | 27% | 6% | 1% | |
| 33 | FUNK Theo S. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 35% | 7% |
| 34 | KELLY Benjamin J. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 15% | 1% |
| 35 | XIAO Anthony | 100% | 100% | 95% | 65% | 24% | 4% | - |
| 36 | PIESNER Joshua C. | 100% | 98% | 83% | 49% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 37 | CAI Jason Zhicheng | 100% | 97% | 77% | 39% | 10% | 1% | |
| 38 | WONG Anthony M. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 56% | 16% | |
| 39 | JEON Caleb A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 41% | 8% |
| 40 | WU Conrad J. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 77% | 36% | 8% | 1% |
| 41 | FUKUDA Renzo K. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 56% | 21% | 3% |
| 42 | JORDON Kaleb W. | 100% | 98% | 83% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 43 | KIM Aaron J. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 74% | 40% | 12% | 1% |
| 44 | ALFARO Sergio Raul O. | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 45 | FARQUHARSON Cole | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 19% | |
| 46 | MAO Connor | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 21% | 3% |
| 47 | BARTEL Jacob L. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 48% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 48 | JEON Nathan S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 19% |
| 49 | NGUYEN Jett | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 35% | 5% |
| 50 | WANG Andrew | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 30% | 7% | 1% |
| 51 | KIM Isaiah G. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
| 52 | CHAN Anthony | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
| 53 | ARNOLD Oscar A. | 100% | 99% | 87% | 57% | 22% | 4% | |
| 54 | YU Anders | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 31% | 6% | |
| 55 | HSIUNG Richie | 100% | 93% | 61% | 21% | 3% | - | |
| 56 | KIM Banseok | 100% | 66% | 24% | 5% | - | - | |
| 57 | RYOU Aiden | 100% | 76% | 32% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 58 | LUNA Emilio | 100% | 93% | 64% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 59 | REDDINGTON aidan | 100% | 64% | 21% | 3% | - | - | |
| 60 | DARIANO Noah G. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 28% | 5% | |
| 61 | WOMACH Tristan | 100% | 67% | 25% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 62 | NG Eben S. | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 63 | CHEN Wilson | 100% | 97% | 75% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 64 | LIM Charles Q. | 100% | 84% | 43% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 65 | VARGAS Bryan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 60% | 24% | 4% |
| 66 | AMICO Julian F. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 66% | 25% | 4% | - |
| 67 | SCHENCK Theo | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 68 | XIAO EDWARD | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 35% | 9% | 1% |
| 69 | MO Jason | 100% | 93% | 66% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 70 | NAM Michael | 100% | 75% | 27% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 71 | GOBBO Alexander | 100% | 98% | 84% | 47% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 72 | SUNG Chang-Han S. | 100% | 96% | 76% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 73 | GOLDADE Luke A. | 100% | 95% | 71% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 73 | DORMAN Patrick | 100% | 85% | 15% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 75 | SWEENEY Quinn | 100% | 78% | 39% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 76 | SHERMAN Marco J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 32% | 4% |
| 77 | MURATA Akitoshi D. | 100% | 85% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 78 | OLARU-HAGEN Eric | 100% | 60% | 18% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 79 | HUANG Kevin D. | 100% | 88% | 51% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 80 | NA Larry | 100% | 74% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 81 | MCCOSH Evin M. | 100% | 61% | 19% | 3% | - | - | |
| 82 | CHEN Brian | 100% | 66% | 24% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 83 | HOBSON Aaron K. | 100% | 95% | 63% | 20% | 3% | - | |
| 84 | JEFFERY Jakob | 100% | 53% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 84 | LI Avery Peihong | 100% | 88% | 50% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 86 | HARRIS Rhonen | 100% | 61% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 86 | PETERSON Lucas | 100% | 20% | - | - | - | - | - |
| 88 | WONG Louis | 100% | 34% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
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.