La Jolla, CA - 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 | KIM Shawn J. | - | - | - | 3% | 20% | 44% | 33% |
| 2 | FLORES Gerardo (Gerardito) D. | - | - | 5% | 25% | 48% | 22% | |
| 3 | LEONELLI Alexandre | - | - | 3% | 18% | 44% | 35% | |
| 3 | CHO Justin W. | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 41% | 22% | |
| 5 | FRIAS Saul F. | - | - | 2% | 10% | 30% | 40% | 19% |
| 6 | BAILEY Asher | - | 5% | 21% | 36% | 29% | 9% | |
| 7 | EMIR PUTRA Syed Adam | - | - | 2% | 13% | 35% | 37% | 13% |
| 8 | LAU Cheung Kang | - | - | 4% | 21% | 41% | 27% | 6% |
| 9 | OSTER Keegan J. | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 22% | |
| 10 | RABINKOV Anthony | 2% | 20% | 39% | 29% | 9% | 1% | |
| 11 | SINGER Carson | - | - | - | 4% | 23% | 44% | 28% |
| 12 | KUPANOFF Dimitri N. | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 43% | 41% |
| 13 | ROBERTS Sam | 1% | 6% | 25% | 39% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 14 | LI Joshua L. | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 35% | 9% | 1% |
| 15 | BREIER Satchel E. | - | 4% | 20% | 38% | 29% | 8% | |
| 16 | TANG Alex Y. | - | 3% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 8% | |
| 17 | NOBLE Daniel | - | 8% | 31% | 41% | 18% | 2% | |
| 18 | PARK Justin W. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 43% | 33% | |
| 19 | JEFFORDS Alexander | - | 2% | 12% | 33% | 38% | 15% | |
| 20 | MISOGAS Matthew B. | - | 5% | 25% | 40% | 25% | 5% | |
| 21 | IWAMOTO Eric Y. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 42% | 16% |
| 22 | TAO Stone Z. | - | 5% | 28% | 42% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 23 | RAJA Arnav | - | - | 3% | 18% | 38% | 32% | 9% |
| 24 | BERGER Oliver | - | 1% | 12% | 33% | 36% | 16% | 3% |
| 25 | FALLICK Ozzie | 1% | 12% | 32% | 35% | 17% | 3% | |
| 26 | GRIFFIN Nicholas D. | 2% | 16% | 34% | 32% | 14% | 2% | |
| 27 | BARBER William S. | 1% | 9% | 30% | 38% | 20% | 3% | |
| 28 | YANG Kevin S. | - | - | 2% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 14% |
| 29 | SHERFA Abagaaz J. | - | 2% | 14% | 37% | 36% | 11% | |
| 30 | TANN Justin | 1% | 11% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 2% | |
| 31 | KOUNALAKIS Antoneo T. | - | 3% | 17% | 37% | 34% | 9% | |
| 32 | REYES Xavier M. | 6% | 26% | 39% | 23% | 5% | - | |
| 33 | KIM Benjamin H. | - | 3% | 16% | 37% | 34% | 11% | |
| 34 | LEE Kevin H. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 29% | 46% | 17% |
| 35 | HUANG Zekai | 1% | 13% | 37% | 34% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 36 | CORNEJO Jeffrey A. | - | 3% | 21% | 39% | 28% | 9% | 1% |
| 37 | PORTMANN Stein J. | 3% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 3% | |
| 38 | LIU David J. | - | 6% | 23% | 37% | 27% | 7% | |
| 39 | HICHA Paul R. | 5% | 37% | 39% | 15% | 3% | - | |
| 40 | FLORES Peter D. | 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 8% | |
| 41 | RIGGINS Littleton K. | - | 4% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 11% | 2% |
| 42 | TRINH Trevor Z. | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% | |
| 43 | LE Hayden | 2% | 15% | 34% | 33% | 14% | 2% | |
| 44 | MATSUI Alen K. | 3% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 13% | 2% | |
| 45 | GERSHENFELD Ethan N. | 2% | 14% | 31% | 32% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 46 | ALKIN Isaac | - | 17% | 39% | 32% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 47 | REED Samuel J. | 12% | 36% | 36% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 48 | CHANG Colin S. | 2% | 19% | 39% | 29% | 9% | 1% | |
| 49 | SWORDS Evan F. | 28% | 50% | 19% | 3% | - | - | |
| 50 | LIU Christopher X. | 12% | 41% | 35% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 51 | MADRID Derek | 70% | 26% | 3% | - | - | - | |
| 52 | HAWKINS Jasper R. | 20% | 46% | 28% | 6% | - | - | - |
| 53 | HODGES Calvin | 31% | 43% | 21% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 54 | CHANIN Liam R. | 45% | 46% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 55 | GIL Ricardo | 9% | 37% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 56 | KORINTH Alexander J. | 69% | 27% | 4% | - | - | - | |
| 57 | PLONKA Derek | 45% | 39% | 13% | 2% | - | - | |
| 58 | RAMIREZ AMAYA Sebastian | 34% | 44% | 18% | 3% | - | - | |
| 59 | BAILEY Nate | 7% | 31% | 40% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 60 | CHANG LAWRENCE | 33% | 44% | 19% | 4% | - | - | |
| 60 | KORINTH Steve | 36% | 46% | 17% | 2% | - | - | |
| 62 | GOMES John F. | 23% | 47% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 63 | ERIKSON Steven | 16% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 63 | DHANANI Zain | 71% | 28% | 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.