Greater Richmond Convention Center - Richmond, VA, 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 | RIGGINS Joshua | - | - | 1% | 8% | 35% | 56% | |
2 | SAUNIER Cameron | - | 3% | 16% | 38% | 35% | 7% | |
3 | PARK Ian C. | - | - | - | - | 6% | 34% | 59% |
3 | GLENNON Sebastian J. | - | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 38% | 17% |
5 | CLICK Tristan | - | - | 4% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 6% |
6 | LAM Alan | - | - | 3% | 13% | 31% | 37% | 17% |
7 | LEE JoonWon | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 42% | 9% |
8 | SINGH Ravin | - | 4% | 21% | 39% | 29% | 7% | |
9 | HEADRICK Lance | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 40% | 47% |
10 | WANG Clayton | - | - | 3% | 13% | 31% | 37% | 16% |
11 | PETROW Zoryan | - | 4% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 8% | |
12 | YI Nathan | 2% | 14% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% | |
13 | JORDAN Anton | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 40% | 47% |
14 | TIKHONOV Daniel | - | - | 3% | 18% | 44% | 30% | 5% |
15 | RUSSELL James | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
16 | LEE Aiden | 1% | 11% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 2% | |
17 | DESTEFANO Julius | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 42% | 44% |
18 | HAN Sam | - | - | 4% | 20% | 40% | 29% | 6% |
19 | HULL Liam | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 33% | 15% | 3% |
20 | CHENH Justin | - | 5% | 20% | 36% | 30% | 9% | |
21 | MODANLOU Navid | - | 3% | 12% | 28% | 33% | 19% | 4% |
22 | BERNARD Jack B. | - | - | 3% | 14% | 33% | 36% | 14% |
23 | FISHMAN Rahm | - | - | 5% | 23% | 43% | 29% | |
24 | ESPINAL DAPIC Nicolas | 6% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 8% | 1% | |
25 | ALI Farhan | - | - | 3% | 15% | 38% | 35% | 8% |
26 | DUAN eric | - | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 43% | 15% |
27 | LEE Benjamin | 4% | 21% | 38% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - |
28 | MEGGERS Davin | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 38% | 18% | 2% |
29 | BUI Henry | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 41% | 26% | |
30 | ZHANG Lucas | 2% | 12% | 33% | 37% | 15% | 2% | |
31 | LEECH Braedan | 20% | 41% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - | |
32 | CHEN Brian | - | - | 2% | 11% | 31% | 38% | 17% |
33 | LEE Aiden | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 40% | 20% | 3% |
34 | HEADRICK Jack | 1% | 8% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 7% | 1% |
35 | DONNELLY Enzo | 5% | 26% | 43% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
36 | WATERS Nathaniel | 12% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
37 | MAROCHNIK Daniel | - | 1% | 8% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 7% |
38 | CHEMEZOV Trent | - | 1% | 11% | 32% | 37% | 17% | 2% |
39 | PAL Ian K. | 1% | 10% | 31% | 37% | 17% | 3% | - |
39 | YAP Nathan | 1% | 11% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 5% | - |
41 | ARMSTRONG TyLee | 3% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - |
42 | FONG Henry | 41% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
43 | KE Sebastian | 5% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
44 | YANG Gary | 1% | 6% | 22% | 35% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
45 | SHILOV Maxim | 9% | 29% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
46 | KONG Brandon | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | |
47 | CHAWLA Aarav | 7% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 7% | 1% | - |
48 | MARKOWITZ Sam | 5% | 29% | 40% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
49 | REKHI Krish | 25% | 41% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
50 | CHO Alex | 3% | 23% | 40% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - |
51 | DINKINS Adam | - | 7% | 29% | 43% | 19% | 3% | - |
52 | EVANS George | 19% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | |
53 | KIM Joshua | 4% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 7% | - | |
54 | SZIEDE Kieran | 8% | 37% | 37% | 15% | 3% | - | |
54 | DAVIS Andrew | 60% | 33% | 6% | - | - | - | |
56 | DAVIS Jonah | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
57 | LEE Anton | 13% | 34% | 33% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
58 | NOLAN Tyler | 18% | 45% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
59 | WANG Aiden | 3% | 22% | 41% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - |
60 | MAXWELL Sheito | 51% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
61 | BROSNAN Solomon | 28% | 43% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
62 | RAPALSKI Thomas | 4% | 19% | 34% | 28% | 12% | 2% | - |
63 | LIN Haley | 16% | 37% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - | |
64 | ADDYSON Aidan | 16% | 43% | 31% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
65 | BANG Dylan | 55% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
66 | GATEWOOD Michael | 39% | 44% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
67 | ODEA Ryan | 2% | 15% | 36% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - |
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.