Anaheim , CA - Anaheim, CA, 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 | HEATHCOCK Colin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 48% | 13% |
| 2 | DENNER Lysander H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 82% | 36% | |
| 3 | HARLEY Colby A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 25% | |
| 3 | ZHOU Matthew R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 54% | 15% | |
| 5 | WILLIAMS Nolan E. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 26% | |
| 6 | CHANG Brandon | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 68% | 23% | |
| 7 | KIM Sean G. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% | |
| 8 | KIM Minwook | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 23% | |
| 9 | CALLAHAN Jaden P. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 41% | 10% |
| 10 | BROWNE JR ROLSTON D. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 65% | 26% | 4% |
| 11 | JEFFORDS Alexander | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 56% | 18% |
| 11 | FRISHMAN Ethan J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 24% |
| 13 | YOUNG Nash | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 66% | 23% |
| 14 | NOBLE Daniel | 100% | 100% | 98% | 81% | 46% | 14% | 2% |
| 15 | GINIS Nathan | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 31% | 6% | |
| 16 | DENNER Maximilian P. | 100% | 99% | 83% | 45% | 13% | 1% | |
| 17 | KIM Andrew H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 45% | 10% |
| 18 | HONG Marshall Q. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 35% |
| 19 | DHINGRA Gian K. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 42% | 9% | |
| 20 | CHO Brandon | 100% | 99% | 86% | 52% | 16% | 2% | |
| 21 | LE Hayden | 100% | 97% | 78% | 42% | 12% | 1% | |
| 22 | DILLREE Spencer S. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 58% | 21% | 3% |
| 23 | CHAN Matthew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 62% | 19% |
| 24 | NG Jonathan H. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 35% | 7% |
| 25 | YANG Ziyi | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 37% | 6% | |
| 26 | MICHNA Colin P. | 100% | 96% | 73% | 33% | 7% | - | |
| 27 | TANG Alex Y. | 100% | 96% | 72% | 33% | 8% | 1% | |
| 28 | FLORES Peter D. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 67% | 29% | 6% | - |
| 29 | HJERPE Wade H. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 32% | 8% | 1% |
| 30 | LIU Kelly | 100% | 95% | 64% | 25% | 4% | - | |
| 31 | BARBER William S. | 100% | 98% | 82% | 45% | 11% | 1% | |
| 32 | BERGER Oliver | 100% | 99% | 84% | 49% | 16% | 2% | |
| 33 | CHEN Lucas B. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 73% | 35% | 9% | 1% |
| 34 | CHENNURU Nischal | 100% | 97% | 67% | 25% | 5% | - | |
| 35 | RAI Avin | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 26% | 5% | |
| 36 | TANN Justin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 61% | 21% | 3% |
| 37 | LEITH Jack | 100% | 61% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 38 | WANG Eric Y. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 32% | 6% | |
| 39 | KAYDALIN Artyom | 100% | 87% | 51% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 40 | ALKIN Isaac | 100% | 92% | 59% | 20% | 3% | - | |
| 41 | JINICH Ilan R. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 26% | 5% | - |
| 42 | HOUTZ Jackson | 100% | 97% | 76% | 39% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 43 | REYES Xavier M. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 73% | 38% | 11% | 1% |
| 44 | BAILEY Asher | 100% | 100% | 94% | 72% | 35% | 7% | |
| 45 | GREEN IV James (Bud) | 100% | 99% | 89% | 58% | 21% | 3% | |
| 46 | XU William | 100% | 77% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 47 | LEUNG Nathan | 100% | 38% | 6% | - | - | - | |
| 48 | HASNAH Henry | 100% | 95% | 66% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
| 49 | UEYAMA Ietetsu A. | 100% | 97% | 79% | 42% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 50 | REED Samuel J. | 100% | 44% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 51 | VO Minh Q. | 100% | 90% | 50% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 52 | SEAL Maximus R. | 100% | 60% | 17% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 53 | GAFFNEY John M. | 100% | 60% | 18% | 2% | - | - | |
| 54 | KORINTH Alexander J. | 100% | 22% | 2% | - | - | - | |
| 55 | PROCHAZKA Archer R. | 100% | 45% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 56 | GRATHWOL-SEAR Oliver | 100% | 39% | 7% | 1% | - | - | |
| 57 | LIKER Maxim J. | 100% | 79% | 32% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 57 | WANG Aragorn | 100% | 83% | 38% | 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.