Liacouras Center - Philadelphia, PA, 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 | 7 | 8 | ||
| 1 | INSLER Ethan C. | - | - | 3% | 13% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 4% | |
| 2 | MARAKOV Allen B. | - | - | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 42% | 28% | |
| 3 | TOWNSEND Avery | - | - | - | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 31% | 10% |
| 3 | DAO Matthew M. | - | - | - | 1% | 6% | 19% | 33% | 30% | 11% |
| 5 | CHEN Eric | - | 2% | 11% | 26% | 31% | 20% | 8% | 2% | - |
| 6 | RHYU Kozmo | - | - | 1% | 6% | 20% | 35% | 30% | 9% | |
| 7 | IVAKIMOV Vasil | - | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 4% | |
| 8 | CHO Tyler H. | - | - | 1% | 4% | 17% | 32% | 30% | 14% | 2% |
| 9 | HUGHES Levi | - | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 6% | |
| 10 | ADLER Ian B. | - | - | - | 4% | 26% | 46% | 23% | ||
| 11 | KAMBESELES Peter G. | - | - | - | 5% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 8% | |
| 12 | YUROVCHAK Andrew T. | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 34% | 34% | 12% | |
| 13 | WESTEN Zach | - | - | - | 1% | 6% | 19% | 34% | 30% | 10% |
| 14 | WIMMER Chandler | - | - | - | 3% | 14% | 30% | 32% | 17% | 3% |
| 16 | WONG Nicholas | - | 1% | 13% | 33% | 34% | 16% | 3% | ||
| 17 | ZHAO Luhan | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 4% | ||
| 18 | LEHR William D. | - | - | 2% | 13% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 19 | BHATNAGAR Ayan | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | ||
| 20 | WILCOX Alexander | 1% | 13% | 46% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - | ||
| 21 | WU Joey | - | 1% | 9% | 31% | 41% | 17% | |||
| 22 | SMITH Nicholas | - | 5% | 22% | 38% | 28% | 7% | |||
| 23 | CLAYTON Robert | 15% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 3% | - | - | - | |
| 24 | YI Kyle | - | 2% | 11% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 5% | ||
| 25 | INSLER Gabriel C. | - | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 35% | 36% | 12% |
| 26 | GANA Jr Jorge M. | - | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 5% | |
| 27 | HANDBERG Paul | - | 6% | 22% | 34% | 26% | 10% | 1% | ||
| 28 | GUI Runlin | 3% | 20% | 38% | 28% | 10% | 2% | - | ||
| 31 | CARVALHO Danny | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 33% | 20% | 6% | 1% | |
| 32 | KANG Michael H.J. | 1% | 10% | 31% | 37% | 18% | 3% | |||
| 33 | ROY Joseph | - | - | - | 6% | 30% | 44% | 20% | ||
| 34 | KIM Ethan | - | - | 1% | 5% | 16% | 30% | 30% | 15% | 3% |
| 35 | YU Colin | - | - | 1% | 23% | 49% | 27% | |||
| 36 | SERAFIN Ben | 5% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - | ||
| 37 | FLEYSH Dennis | - | - | 5% | 22% | 35% | 26% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 38 | PARKER Riley D. | - | 7% | 32% | 36% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 39 | MISHIMA Torata | - | - | 4% | 17% | 31% | 29% | 14% | 4% | - |
| 40 | LOPEZ-SIMPSON Victor | 1% | 14% | 51% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 41 | GHAZALEH Thomas | - | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 35% | 32% | 11% | |
| 42 | FREEMAN Zachary | 53% | 44% | 3% | - | - | - | |||
| 43 | ROMERO Caleb | - | 17% | 37% | 30% | 12% | 3% | - | - | |
| 44 | TUMIBAY Noah C. | - | - | 5% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 45 | ANDREEV Arthur | - | - | 2% | 9% | 23% | 33% | 25% | 8% | |
| 46 | TOPAZ Nicholas A. | 3% | 18% | 38% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - | - | |
| 46 | VAN NIMWEGEN Nicholas | 47% | 38% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - | - | |
| 48 | YAGNIK Yash | 75% | 23% | 2% | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 49 | RASSEL John | 38% | 59% | 3% | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 51 | BELSELAH Omar | 25% | 42% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - | - | ||
| 52 | CORRIDON Jack T. | 23% | 47% | 24% | 5% | - | - | - | - | |
| 53 | TURNER Sahij | 17% | 47% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 54 | PEREVORUKHOV Ivan | 82% | 17% | 1% | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 55 | MORRIS James | - | 8% | 33% | 42% | 16% | ||||
| 58 | MARTINEZ Jose | 35% | 60% | 4% | - | - | ||||
| 59 | SPECTER Luka | 61% | 38% | 1% | - | - | ||||
| 60 | GULLO Kenji Y. | - | 3% | 66% | 28% | 3% | ||||
| 64 | FINK Jake | 40% | 43% | 15% | 2% | |||||
| 65 | GUIDANGEN Jason | 57% | 41% | 2% | - | - | ||||
| 66 | NEEMAN Benjamin | 85% | 14% | - | - | - | ||||
| 68 | STAFFORD Neti | 64% | 35% | 2% | - | - | ||||
| 68 | GUADAMUZ Cesar | 94% | 6% | - | - | - | ||||
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.