Kentucky International Convention Center - Louisville, KY, 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 Howard | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 67% |
2 | YOOK Isaac | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 21% |
3 | TSE Aiden J | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 54% | |
3 | HWANG Jayden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 61% | |
5 | HUANG Alex F. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 78% |
6 | SASSI Ilyas | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 29% | 4% | |
7 | LI Ayden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 52% | 16% |
8 | YE Ivan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 35% | 8% |
9 | BOLLU Viren | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 33% | 7% | |
10 | TANI Tino | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 54% | 17% | |
11 | ANDRES Michael | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 42% |
12 | LIU Aaron | 100% | 99% | 93% | 74% | 42% | 14% | 2% |
13 | CLARK Aram | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 25% | |
14 | KANG Matthew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 34% | 7% |
15 | IM Tyler | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 42% | 9% | |
16 | CHAMBERS Miles | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 74% | 32% | |
17 | YANG Phillip | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 47% | 13% |
18 | LAMTAN Christoffer | 100% | 99% | 88% | 57% | 23% | 5% | < 1% |
19 | NG Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 72% |
20 | ZHANG Kaixuan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 42% | 10% |
21 | LIU Victor | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 65% | 31% | 7% |
22 | OH Aster | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 65% | 19% |
23 | KITSON Chase | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 54% | 18% |
24 | LIU Yijin | 100% | 90% | 60% | 25% | 5% | - | |
25 | NOVOSYOLOK Zachary | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 43% | 7% | |
26 | BIVIJI Ali | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 49% | 14% |
27 | WANG Edward | 100% | 99% | 86% | 52% | 19% | 4% | - |
28 | KROON Landon | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 36% | 10% | 1% |
29 | DOOLEY Atticus | 100% | 96% | 73% | 35% | 8% | 1% | - |
30 | KANG Jeremy | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 27% | 5% | |
31 | LUC Linkin | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 17% | 2% | |
32 | GORDON Samuel | 100% | 94% | 71% | 36% | 11% | 2% | - |
33 | KOVALEV Daniil N. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 41% |
34 | STEVENS Flynn | 100% | 93% | 66% | 29% | 7% | 1% | |
35 | MCDONALD Finn | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 36% | 10% | 1% |
36 | ZHAO Royce | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 58% | 19% | 2% |
37 | ZWAKA Jonas | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 38% | 10% | 1% |
38 | KOVACHEV Martin | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 21% | 2% |
39 | BRIMMER Robert (Trey) | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 63% | 30% | 6% |
40 | KOZLOFF Wyatt | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 64% | 30% | 6% |
41 | BOSITA Brennan | 100% | 98% | 88% | 62% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
41 | PINTO Marcus | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 71% | 35% | 8% |
43 | LI Cooper | 100% | 98% | 84% | 54% | 22% | 5% | - |
44 | NARDINI Nathanael P. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 37% | 8% |
45 | CAO Donald | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 42% | 11% | |
46 | WONG David | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 71% | 36% | 9% |
47 | WONG Max | 100% | 100% | 95% | 78% | 45% | 15% | 2% |
48 | LIU Ethan | 100% | 96% | 78% | 46% | 16% | 3% | - |
49 | KARAVAS Nicholas | 100% | 98% | 86% | 57% | 24% | 6% | 1% |
50 | HWANG Hagan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 54% | 21% | 4% |
51 | LIN Patrick | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
52 | NAIR Sujit | 100% | 89% | 59% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
53 | BAI Evan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 28% | 5% |
54 | LUCAS William | 100% | 98% | 85% | 50% | 15% | 1% | |
55 | VALENCIA Jose | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 36% | 8% | |
56 | NGO Emerson | 100% | 97% | 70% | 29% | 5% | - | |
57 | SAGE Nikolai | 100% | 99% | 81% | 42% | 11% | 1% | |
58 | LEE Brian | 100% | 99% | 92% | 71% | 39% | 13% | 2% |
59 | RINALDI Savio | 100% | 99% | 89% | 65% | 32% | 10% | 1% |
60 | PAUL Jimmy | 100% | 90% | 53% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
61 | PERRIN Leo | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
62 | HENRY Cadel | 100% | 94% | 70% | 33% | 8% | 1% | |
63 | LOSQUADRO Joseph | 100% | 90% | 61% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
64 | CHEN Shawn | 100% | 99% | 88% | 59% | 24% | 4% | - |
65 | DAI Zihou | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 48% | 15% | 1% |
66 | ANAND Rishab | 100% | 100% | 99% | 96% | 80% | 47% | 14% |
67 | SIDDAMSHETTY Ishaan | 100% | 96% | 79% | 48% | 19% | 4% | - |
68 | GRIGORIEV Roman | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 19% | 3% |
69 | LEE Brady | 100% | 98% | 85% | 53% | 20% | 3% | |
70 | LOO Jason | 100% | 96% | 76% | 41% | 13% | 2% | |
71 | GUREVICH Benjamin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 30% | 6% |
72 | SUN Andrew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 56% | 19% |
73 | XIAO Brayden | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
74 | SO Morgan | 100% | 95% | 75% | 42% | 14% | 3% | - |
75 | LIEBOWITZ Carson | 100% | 94% | 70% | 36% | 11% | 2% | - |
76 | LI linze | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 34% | 7% | |
77 | KUMAR Avinash | 100% | 87% | 54% | 19% | 4% | - | |
78 | KANIA Alexander | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 31% | 7% | - |
79 | SRIVATS Vedh | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 28% | 5% |
80 | JI Johnson | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 51% | 19% | 3% |
81 | KOZLOV Lucas | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 18% | 2% |
81 | BERKOWITZ Gavin | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 52% | 17% | 1% |
83 | DOSTAL Maximilian | 100% | 98% | 83% | 48% | 14% | 2% | - |
84 | HENDERSON Louis | 100% | 98% | 84% | 53% | 21% | 4% | - |
85 | LIU Ryan | 100% | 98% | 86% | 59% | 27% | 7% | 1% |
85 | FENG Brendan | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 20% | 4% | - |
87 | LIN Alex | 100% | 94% | 69% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - |
88 | HU Jayden | 100% | 99% | 89% | 63% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
89 | GREENSTEIN Viktor | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 29% | 4% | |
90 | AO Christopher | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 27% | 5% | |
91 | MINASIAN Mason | 100% | 91% | 62% | 27% | 6% | 1% | |
92 | LEE Damian | 100% | 65% | 23% | 5% | - | - | |
93 | LYU Tyler | 100% | 81% | 40% | 10% | 1% | - | |
94 | WONG Ron | 100% | 98% | 88% | 63% | 31% | 9% | 1% |
95 | BADMUS Joshua | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 21% | 4% | - |
96 | IYER Neil | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 32% | 8% | - |
97 | SLAVNOV Anton | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 4% | - |
98 | JOHNSON Leland | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 40% | 12% | 1% |
99 | SHAPIRO Simon | 100% | 93% | 70% | 36% | 12% | 2% | - |
100 | WELSTEAD Nicholas | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 31% | 8% | 1% |
100 | HE Zhikai (kyle) | 100% | 96% | 69% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - |
102 | WONG Reagan | 100% | 92% | 65% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - |
103 | FOSTY Jasper | 100% | 89% | 55% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
104 | BIVIJI Adam | 100% | 92% | 66% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - |
105 | MATTOO Dhruv | 100% | 93% | 64% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - |
106 | BARRY Dave | 100% | 80% | 38% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
107 | KOHLER Vaughn | 100% | 69% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
108 | ZHU Matthew | 100% | 94% | 71% | 34% | 9% | 1% | |
109 | TANG Morgan | 100% | 96% | 77% | 41% | 12% | 2% | |
110 | PAK Andrew | 100% | 85% | 48% | 14% | 2% | - | |
111 | TASIKAS Peter | 100% | 93% | 65% | 26% | 5% | - | |
112 | SONG Aidan | 100% | 92% | 65% | 29% | 7% | 1% | |
113 | ONG Dylan | 100% | 93% | 68% | 32% | 8% | 1% | |
114 | VO Blake | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 16% | 2% | - |
115 | MHLEY Gavin | 100% | 85% | 50% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
116 | SUN Andy | 100% | 91% | 63% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - |
117 | SAYAR Luke | 100% | 82% | 46% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
118 | HUANG Anthony | 100% | 28% | 3% | - | - | - | |
119 | BELAND Riley James "RJ" | 100% | 97% | 84% | 56% | 25% | 6% | 1% |
119 | BRADIC Andreja | 100% | 41% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
119 | ZHANG Aiden | 100% | 61% | 20% | 4% | - | - | - |
119 | BARENBOYM Michael | 100% | 94% | 72% | 38% | 12% | 2% | - |
123 | TAYCHER Aaron | 100% | 83% | 46% | 15% | 3% | - | |
124 | ROBINSON Ezra | 100% | 76% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
125 | YAO Zachary | 100% | 71% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
125 | HERRERA Stefano | 100% | 50% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
127 | DUFF Michael | 100% | 73% | 30% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
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.