John T. Rhodes Myrtle Beach Sports Center - Myrtle Beach, SC, 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 | DINKINS Ramadan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 25% |
| 2 | MUNLIN Donovan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 56% | |
| 3 | ELLINGTON Keegan A. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 23% | 3% | |
| 3 | LIN Harrison | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 42% | 13% | 2% |
| 5 | CLICK Aiden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 28% |
| 6 | HULL Liam | 100% | 93% | 65% | 27% | 5% | - | |
| 7 | LEONE III Charles D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 15% |
| 8 | FULLER George K. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 62% | 23% |
| 9 | WANG Maxwell L. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 42% | 11% |
| 10 | ALLEY Everett T | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 44% | 15% | 2% |
| 11 | LAM Alan | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 28% | 5% | |
| 12 | DISIMONE David Z. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 36% | 8% |
| 13 | WALLACE James | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 25% | 5% |
| 14 | KROPP Jack | 100% | 99% | 92% | 65% | 26% | 4% | |
| 15 | DAN Rex | 100% | 97% | 79% | 45% | 14% | 2% | |
| 16 | TATE William Isom | 100% | 71% | 29% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 17 | SINGH Ravin | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 4% | < 1% |
| 18 | BERNARD Jack B. | 100% | 99% | 87% | 56% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 19 | GLENNON Sebastian J. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 66% | 32% | 7% |
| 20 | DANIEL Camron | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 16% | |
| 21 | LIN Kason | 100% | 98% | 82% | 45% | 13% | 1% | |
| 22 | FACCI Michael J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 22% | |
| 23 | SAKO Ayrton J. | 100% | 96% | 69% | 30% | 6% | - | |
| 24 | GARCIA-CABRERA Jeffrey | 100% | 80% | 42% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 25 | LAM Bill | 100% | 95% | 74% | 39% | 11% | 1% | |
| 26 | VACCARO Dominick J. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 37% | 11% | 1% |
| 27 | CHUNG Joshua | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 29% | 6% | 1% |
| 28 | CHRISTY Peter C. | 100% | 96% | 77% | 41% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 29 | SNYDER Ari | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 15% | 2% | |
| 30 | RUSSELL James | 100% | 88% | 54% | 18% | 3% | - | |
| 31 | YI Kyle | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 51% | 14% | |
| 32 | JACKSON James | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 26% | 5% | - |
| 33 | SWENSON Keane J. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 53% | 14% | |
| 34 | TABLEMAN Doug S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 30% | |
| 35 | DUPREE Thomas | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 39% | 7% | |
| 36 | DINKINS Adam | 100% | 86% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 37 | AMOLSCH Dylan | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 38 | NORWOOD Malik | 100% | 95% | 72% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 39 | DINKINS Shuayb | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 49% | 14% | |
| 40 | LIU Dylan Y. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 45% | 14% | 2% | |
| 41 | RACHEL Dylan | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 23% | 4% | |
| 42 | CHEN Wesley | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 30% | |
| 43 | XIE Brandon | 100% | 78% | 34% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 44 | MODULLA Yathin R. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 52% | 19% | 3% |
| 45 | DAVIS Jonah | 100% | 100% | 94% | 75% | 42% | 13% | 2% |
| 46 | NUDELMAN Aleksandr | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 54% | 21% | 3% |
| 47 | EVANS Allen L. | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 42% | 14% | 2% |
| 48 | HE Lingyun Matthew | 100% | 95% | 70% | 34% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 49 | REDDY Daksh | 100% | 66% | 24% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 50 | SCHARF Ryan | 100% | 98% | 85% | 50% | 15% | 2% | |
| 51 | TOUSSAINT Semaj | 100% | 98% | 83% | 49% | 14% | 1% | |
| 52 | PAL Ian K. | 100% | 76% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 53 | SCHIAVONE Oreste | 100% | 82% | 42% | 12% | 1% | - | |
| 54 | SHAFRITZ Noah | 100% | 67% | 23% | 4% | - | - | |
| 55 | PATEL Shloke | 100% | 88% | 56% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 55 | CARNALL Hunter | 100% | 82% | 44% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 57 | JONES Jackson | 100% | 47% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 58 | KIM Joshua | 100% | 48% | 11% | 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.