Wayne State University Matthaei Building - Detroit, MI, 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 | STANLEY Mason B. | - | - | - | 2% | 21% | 77% | |
2 | YANG Luao | - | - | - | - | 7% | 93% | |
3 | MCISAAC Finn | - | - | 1% | 10% | 34% | 41% | 15% |
3 | LEUNG Ethan | - | - | 4% | 19% | 38% | 31% | 8% |
5 | SENIC Lucas | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 34% | 59% |
6 | ALLEN Henry G. | - | - | 2% | 13% | 41% | 45% | |
7 | VANOYEN Dominick | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% | |
8 | SHEVCHENKO Kostiantyn | - | 6% | 26% | 43% | 24% | 1% | |
9 | ORONOWICZ Jakub | - | - | 5% | 23% | 44% | 28% | |
10 | ASHIDA Tomoaki | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 19% |
11 | COPELAND Nigel | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 37% | 18% | 3% |
12 | EDWARDS Maxon | 1% | 8% | 29% | 40% | 21% | 2% | |
13 | SLUSHER Gideon | - | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 37% | 14% |
14 | STRINGER David | - | - | 3% | 16% | 38% | 37% | 7% |
15 | MASSIMINO Andrew | 1% | 11% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 3% | |
16 | KUE Temujin | 1% | 10% | 30% | 37% | 19% | 3% | |
17 | LEE Ian | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 37% | 18% | 3% |
18 | CHOI JULIE | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 8% |
18 | DUPIN Shana | 1% | 7% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
20 | BLAKEMAN Michael J. | 1% | 11% | 32% | 36% | 17% | 3% | |
21 | GNEUHS Sam | - | 4% | 19% | 38% | 31% | 8% | - |
21 | NAZARIO Dominic | 6% | 27% | 38% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - |
21 | TOWNE Benjamin | - | 6% | 31% | 39% | 20% | 4% | - |
24 | EDWARDS Connor | 14% | 49% | 31% | 6% | - | - | |
25 | MUMMANENI Samyuta | 1% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 6% | |
26 | HARRIS Parker | 32% | 44% | 20% | 4% | - | - | |
27 | FANG Haoyu | - | 5% | 26% | 46% | 22% | - | |
28 | LU Alex | 2% | 15% | 37% | 34% | 12% | 1% | |
29 | DIEPSTRA Jeremy | - | 1% | 14% | 36% | 34% | 13% | 2% |
30 | HUNTER Phillip | 3% | 21% | 45% | 27% | 5% | - | |
31 | XIONG Isabel | 12% | 34% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - | |
32 | LAKAS Darius | 21% | 52% | 22% | 4% | - | - | - |
33 | STONE Sydney | 24% | 42% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - | |
34 | KIM Ethan | 7% | 29% | 38% | 21% | 5% | - | |
35 | PERRIN Emma | 56% | 35% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
36 | SANTOS Carlos R. | - | 7% | 32% | 42% | 18% | 1% | |
37 | TAN Dorathy | 11% | 38% | 37% | 13% | 2% | - | |
38 | IRVINE Brody | 4% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 9% | 1% | |
39 | VARRE Rishi | 13% | 61% | 23% | 3% | - | - | |
40 | MICK Gabriel | 19% | 43% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
41 | CHENH Justin | - | 7% | 31% | 38% | 19% | 4% | - |
42 | WENGER Liam | 34% | 43% | 19% | 4% | - | - | |
43 | DIRKES Catherine | 11% | 33% | 36% | 17% | 4% | - | - |
44 | THEKKEL Jonathan | 40% | 43% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
45 | SCOTT Fredric | 15% | 62% | 21% | 3% | - | - | - |
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.