Anaheim , CA - Anaheim, CA, 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 | HEATHCOCK Colin | - | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 36% | 13% |
| 2 | DENNER Lysander H. | - | - | 2% | 16% | 46% | 36% | |
| 3 | HARLEY Colby A. | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 25% | |
| 3 | ZHOU Matthew R. | - | 1% | 11% | 33% | 39% | 15% | |
| 5 | WILLIAMS Nolan E. | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 42% | 26% | |
| 6 | CHANG Brandon | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 45% | 23% | |
| 7 | KIM Sean G. | - | - | 2% | 14% | 41% | 43% | |
| 8 | KIM Minwook | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 43% | 23% | |
| 9 | CALLAHAN Jaden P. | - | - | 5% | 19% | 36% | 31% | 10% |
| 10 | BROWNE JR ROLSTON D. | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 39% | 22% | 4% |
| 11 | JEFFORDS Alexander | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 38% | 18% |
| 11 | FRISHMAN Ethan J. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 24% |
| 13 | YOUNG Nash | - | - | - | 6% | 27% | 43% | 23% |
| 14 | NOBLE Daniel | - | 2% | 16% | 36% | 32% | 12% | 2% |
| 15 | GINIS Nathan | 1% | 7% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 6% | |
| 16 | DENNER Maximilian P. | 1% | 16% | 38% | 33% | 11% | 1% | |
| 17 | KIM Andrew H. | - | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 35% | 10% |
| 18 | HONG Marshall Q. | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 42% | 35% |
| 19 | DHINGRA Gian K. | - | 3% | 18% | 37% | 32% | 9% | |
| 20 | CHO Brandon | 1% | 13% | 35% | 36% | 14% | 2% | |
| 21 | LE Hayden | 3% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 11% | 1% | |
| 22 | DILLREE Spencer S. | - | 1% | 11% | 30% | 36% | 18% | 3% |
| 23 | CHAN Matthew | - | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 43% | 19% |
| 24 | NG Jonathan H. | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 37% | 28% | 7% |
| 25 | YANG Ziyi | - | 4% | 19% | 39% | 31% | 6% | |
| 26 | MICHNA Colin P. | 4% | 23% | 40% | 26% | 6% | - | |
| 27 | TANG Alex Y. | 4% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 7% | 1% | |
| 28 | FLORES Peter D. | - | 7% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 6% | - |
| 29 | HJERPE Wade H. | 1% | 7% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
| 30 | LIU Kelly | 5% | 31% | 40% | 20% | 4% | - | |
| 31 | BARBER William S. | 2% | 16% | 37% | 34% | 10% | 1% | |
| 32 | BERGER Oliver | 1% | 14% | 35% | 34% | 14% | 2% | |
| 33 | CHEN Lucas B. | - | 4% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
| 34 | CHENNURU Nischal | 3% | 30% | 41% | 21% | 4% | - | |
| 35 | RAI Avin | 1% | 8% | 28% | 38% | 22% | 5% | |
| 36 | TANN Justin | - | 1% | 8% | 31% | 39% | 18% | 3% |
| 37 | LEITH Jack | 39% | 44% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 38 | WANG Eric Y. | - | 5% | 23% | 40% | 26% | 6% | |
| 39 | KAYDALIN Artyom | 13% | 36% | 34% | 14% | 3% | - | |
| 40 | ALKIN Isaac | 8% | 33% | 39% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 41 | JINICH Ilan R. | 1% | 8% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 42 | HOUTZ Jackson | 3% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 43 | REYES Xavier M. | - | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 44 | BAILEY Asher | - | 5% | 22% | 37% | 28% | 7% | |
| 45 | GREEN IV James (Bud) | 1% | 10% | 31% | 37% | 18% | 3% | |
| 46 | XU William | 23% | 41% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 47 | LEUNG Nathan | 62% | 32% | 6% | - | - | - | |
| 48 | HASNAH Henry | 5% | 29% | 44% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
| 49 | UEYAMA Ietetsu A. | 3% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 50 | REED Samuel J. | 56% | 36% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 51 | VO Minh Q. | 10% | 40% | 35% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 52 | SEAL Maximus R. | 40% | 43% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 53 | GAFFNEY John M. | 40% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | |
| 54 | KORINTH Alexander J. | 78% | 20% | 2% | - | - | - | |
| 55 | PROCHAZKA Archer R. | 55% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 56 | GRATHWOL-SEAR Oliver | 61% | 32% | 6% | 1% | - | - | |
| 57 | LIKER Maxim J. | 21% | 48% | 27% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 57 | WANG Aragorn | 17% | 45% | 31% | 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.