Hackensack, NJ - Hackensack, NJ, 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 | GANTA Vijay | 100% | 99% | 90% | 56% | 19% | 2% | |
| 2 | MOSKOWITZ Mason C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 55% | 18% |
| 3 | LEVIN Mark A. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 74% | 38% | 9% | |
| 3 | LEE Jude H. | 100% | 96% | 67% | 26% | 4% | - | |
| 5 | GINIS Nathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 26% | |
| 6 | GILLIGAN Wolff | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 16% |
| 7 | BARTOLO Domenic V. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 17% | |
| 8 | CHAN Matthew | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 47% | 12% | |
| 9 | GHOSH Tuhin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 79% | 46% | 13% |
| 10 | YEN Preston | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 26% | |
| 11 | CHAN Daniel | 100% | 98% | 83% | 49% | 17% | 2% | |
| 12 | EPSTEIN Henry N. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 54% | 21% | 4% |
| 13 | DEWEY Charles J. | 100% | 96% | 79% | 47% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 14 | GEORGE Daniel | 100% | 92% | 65% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 15 | NOBLE Colin | 100% | 98% | 88% | 62% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
| 16 | HUANG Tyler T. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 39% | 12% | 2% |
| 17 | TANG Brendan J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 58% | 20% |
| 18 | CHO Brandon | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 39% | 9% | |
| 19 | TEVEBAUGH Andrew | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 42% | 14% | 2% |
| 20 | WILSON Jude | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 58% | 18% | |
| 21 | TANG Albert | 100% | 100% | 95% | 79% | 48% | 18% | 3% |
| 22 | HONG Vincent Q. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 37% | 11% | 2% |
| 23 | DIPIETRO Christopher J. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 63% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
| 24 | WU MENGKE | 100% | 98% | 85% | 57% | 26% | 7% | 1% |
| 25 | SANDERS Samuel B. | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 27% | 7% | 1% |
| 26 | JUN Ryan | 100% | 95% | 72% | 36% | 10% | 1% | |
| 27 | HUANG Ethan F. | 100% | 98% | 84% | 53% | 20% | 3% | |
| 28 | TIERNO Thomas J. | 100% | 37% | 6% | - | - | - | |
| 29 | FISK Ethan | 100% | 96% | 66% | 24% | 4% | - | |
| 30 | REN Richard | 100% | 90% | 61% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 31 | CHAUDHURI Eeshaan A. | 100% | 90% | 61% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 32 | PATTON Colin T. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 68% | 26% | 4% | |
| 33 | BOURGHOL Matthew | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 40% | 13% | 2% |
| 34 | NEVILLE James | 100% | 85% | 49% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 35 | PANDEY Neil | 100% | 95% | 74% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 36 | LAMHAOUAR Ryan | 100% | 69% | 19% | 2% | - | - | |
| 37 | ELIN Adam E. | 100% | 92% | 66% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 38 | KREGER Evan | 100% | 71% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 39 | MASSO Anthony | 100% | 77% | 34% | 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.