Greater Columbus Convention Center - Columbus, OH, 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 | O'LOUGHLIN Chris S. | - | - | - | - | - | 4% | 96% |
| 2 | RACHTCHININE Alexandre | - | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 41% | 21% |
| 3 | PIENTA Chris J. | - | 3% | 15% | 31% | 33% | 15% | 2% |
| 3 | CRANOR Erich L. | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 41% | 37% |
| 5 | GAINES Aaron | - | - | - | 3% | 15% | 40% | 41% |
| 6 | STEWART Robert | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 7% |
| 7 | MAYCHROWITZ Matt | - | 1% | 9% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 4% |
| 8 | BARREIRO Darren | - | - | 5% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 8% |
| 9 | SNIDER Jeffrey H. | - | 1% | 11% | 35% | 39% | 14% | |
| 10 | NUDELMAN Aleksandr | - | - | 2% | 14% | 42% | 41% | 1% |
| 11 | WHEELER Daniel | - | 2% | 10% | 30% | 39% | 19% | |
| 12 | DEUCHER Joseph H. | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 43% | 34% |
| 13 | WAY Kashi M. | - | - | 2% | 12% | 34% | 38% | 14% |
| 13 | COETZEE Frans M. | - | 8% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
| 15 | MARINI Davide | - | 3% | 27% | 44% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 16 | CALAY Robert J. | 20% | 41% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 17 | LEE Tobias (Toby) T. | - | - | - | 4% | 19% | 42% | 35% |
| 18 | GERACI Paul A. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 40% | 29% | 7% |
| 19 | SPRINGER Michael | - | 5% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 8% | |
| 20 | HITCHCOCK David | - | - | 1% | 5% | 22% | 42% | 31% |
| 21 | PRIHODKO Andrew | - | - | 3% | 18% | 39% | 32% | 8% |
| 21 | ROOD Alex | - | 1% | 11% | 34% | 37% | 15% | 2% |
| 23 | BAILEY Creston P. | - | 2% | 14% | 33% | 34% | 14% | 2% |
| 24 | YAKIMENKO Andrei | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
| 25 | LIU Kun | 3% | 19% | 35% | 29% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 26 | COLETTA David | - | 8% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 27 | SPEICHER Eric V. | 2% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 15% | 2% | |
| 28 | YAO Shun | - | 2% | 21% | 41% | 28% | 6% | |
| 29 | GREENBAUM Isaac | - | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 35% | 10% |
| 30 | HARGROVE Charles | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 5% |
| 31 | HUEY Curtis E. | 4% | 18% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 3% | - |
| 32 | ZHANG Sen | 13% | 34% | 33% | 15% | 4% | - | - |
| 33 | GERSEN Jacob | 1% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
| 34 | KALAPASEV Nenad (Ned) (Ned) S. | - | - | 5% | 25% | 44% | 26% | |
| 35 | KENT Dwain | - | 5% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 8% | |
| 36 | CLINEFELTER Dennis S. | - | 4% | 27% | 42% | 23% | 4% | |
| 37 | ROBERTS Peter | - | 4% | 17% | 33% | 31% | 13% | 2% |
| 38 | THOMAS Jr. Robert D. | 3% | 19% | 35% | 29% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 39 | ELTERMAN Lev | 1% | 17% | 37% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 40 | WILLIAMS Brett | 3% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 41 | KERTESZ Stefan G. | 2% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 42 | HILLSTROM Nathan | - | 2% | 23% | 43% | 27% | 5% | - |
| 43 | FERRIERE Thomas | 10% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 44 | BERNSTEIN Stuart E. | 1% | 7% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
| 45 | GAO "George" Xiaojiang | 4% | 47% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 46 | KRYLTSOV Greg | - | 1% | 13% | 39% | 38% | 10% | - |
| 47 | WARD Carrington R. | 32% | 43% | 20% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 48 | ARMSTRONG Gary | 1% | 18% | 46% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 49 | CAMPBELL Paul | 19% | 40% | 29% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 50 | SIMS Martin L. | 50% | 43% | 6% | - | - | - | |
| 51 | KLINE R. Jay | 2% | 11% | 30% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 52 | VAUGHN David | - | 11% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 53 | GREGORY Dean | - | 6% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
| 54 | ROGERS John D. | 44% | 50% | 6% | - | - | - | - |
| 55 | FELDMAN Louis | 43% | 50% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
| 56 | CANNON Casey C. | 75% | 23% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 57 | MILLER Brent | 13% | 34% | 33% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
| 58 | KORMANN Joseph | 32% | 54% | 13% | 1% | - | - | |
| 59 | JEFFCOAT Timothy | 35% | 41% | 19% | 4% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | PLUMMER Ken | 87% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 61 | CHEN Mao Long | 87% | 12% | - | - | - | - | - |
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.