Danvers Indoor Sports - Danvers, MA, 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 | LI Richard | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 54% | 17% |
| 2 | LAI Boden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 34% |
| 3 | WU Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 45% |
| 3 | SAVORETTI Francesco | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 70% | 21% |
| 5 | LIU Adam | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 39% | 8% |
| 6 | SAVORETTI Pietro | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 30% | 5% |
| 7 | CHEN Allen | 100% | 100% | 94% | 75% | 41% | 13% | 2% |
| 8 | HU Lucas | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 53% | 16% |
| 9 | WONG King-Yee | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 56% | 21% | 3% |
| 10 | TRAN Spencer | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 43% | 13% | 1% |
| 11 | WANG Daniel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 42% |
| 12 | MEN Junda | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 37% | 8% |
| 13 | PRIHODKO Max | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 52% |
| 14 | DOUBOV Andrew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 47% | 12% |
| 15 | RIM Eugene | 100% | 98% | 86% | 57% | 24% | 5% | - |
| 16 | OTTAVIANO Aaron | 100% | 71% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 17 | BELLIVEAU Emmett S. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 64% | 28% | 4% |
| 18 | LAI Aedin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 46% |
| 19 | KARIMOV Amir | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 61% | 26% | 5% |
| 20 | SONG Changze | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 37% | 10% | 1% |
| 21 | WHITE Aidan | 100% | 89% | 54% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
| 22 | ORESKOVIC Olivier | 100% | 90% | 59% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
| 23 | FENG Du | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
| 24 | CHEN Luowen | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 42% | 13% | 1% |
| 25 | RADZIKOWSKI Sam | 100% | 95% | 72% | 35% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 25 | RVACHEV Michael | 100% | 96% | 76% | 42% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 27 | ZENG Andrew | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 44% | 11% | 1% |
| 28 | LIU Jeremiah W. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 28% | 4% |
| 29 | GUAN Nathan | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 63% | 26% | 4% |
| 30 | GLUSHKOV David | 100% | 89% | 56% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 31 | SHOUSHA Yassin | 100% | 100% | 94% | 72% | 37% | 10% | 1% |
| 32 | TESFAYE Elias | 100% | 85% | 51% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 33 | FEINBERG James Y. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 26% | 5% | - |
| 34 | NALLICHERI Ayaan | 100% | 87% | 53% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
| 35 | XIE Brandon | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 42% | 11% |
| 36 | KIM Nathan | 100% | 93% | 67% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 37 | ZHANG Dinghao | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 17% | 2% |
| 38 | SINGLETON Aman | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 32% | 8% | 1% |
| 39 | MASSE Jack | 100% | 89% | 56% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 40 | SONG Ryan | 100% | 71% | 26% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 41 | PAN Anthony | 100% | 89% | 56% | 21% | 5% | - | - |
| 42 | BAJAJ Nakul | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 32% | 8% | 1% |
| 43 | HELMY Richard | 100% | 99% | 89% | 63% | 27% | 6% | 1% |
| 44 | DOWD Peter L. | 100% | 99% | 85% | 52% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 44 | PETERSEN Zachary | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 46 | BRAVO ORTEGA Estéfano | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 26% | 5% |
| 47 | SHA Michael | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 48% | 14% |
| 48 | MOSKOWITZ Martin | 100% | 95% | 71% | 34% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 49 | PESSIN Nadav | 100% | 93% | 68% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 50 | BO Genero | 100% | 85% | 48% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 51 | KELLEY Hayden | 100% | 93% | 69% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 52 | KIM Remington | 100% | 90% | 57% | 22% | 4% | - | - |
| 52 | GU Eric | 100% | 37% | 6% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 54 | ZHAI Christopher | 100% | 79% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | OSHIMA Robert | 100% | 74% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | CONNER James | 100% | 94% | 60% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
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.