Intercontinental - Los Angeles Hotel - Los Angeles, 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 | LEE Jaden | - | - | - | - | 2% | 19% | 79% |
| 2 | LEE Abin | - | - | 2% | 14% | 39% | 39% | 6% |
| 3 | LI Lucas | - | - | - | - | 3% | 25% | 72% |
| 3 | PARK Andrew | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 41% | 42% |
| 5 | YU ShiYu (Henry) | - | - | - | 2% | 11% | 38% | 49% |
| 6 | YE Jerry | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 44% | 36% |
| 7 | ZHANG Jason | - | - | 5% | 23% | 46% | 26% | |
| 8 | WANG sicheng | - | 2% | 16% | 47% | 35% | ||
| 9 | XU Ethan | - | - | 2% | 10% | 31% | 41% | 16% |
| 10 | MAO Runxian | - | - | 5% | 22% | 43% | 27% | 3% |
| 11 | PARK Avan | - | 1% | 16% | 51% | 32% | ||
| 12 | LIU Zichen | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 42% | 36% |
| 13 | JEON Joohun | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 37% | 21% | 4% |
| 14 | CHEN Jason | - | 1% | 6% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 6% |
| 15 | PARK Kaiden | - | 1% | 9% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 2% |
| 16 | WONG Connor | 1% | 9% | 32% | 40% | 16% | 2% | |
| 17 | SUN Roy | - | - | 2% | 17% | 45% | 35% | |
| 18 | TSUI Raedyn Ho Hin | - | 1% | 11% | 47% | 42% | ||
| 19 | MURDOCK Koichi | - | 1% | 11% | 32% | 37% | 17% | 2% |
| 20 | HONG Edwin | - | - | 4% | 21% | 45% | 29% | |
| 20 | GUO Austin | - | - | 6% | 26% | 46% | 23% | |
| 22 | WANG Waylon | - | 3% | 20% | 49% | 28% | ||
| 23 | LI Aaron | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
| 24 | TROYANKER Makar | 1% | 9% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 25 | LEE Joshua | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 12% | 1% |
| 26 | WANG Eason | 1% | 11% | 33% | 38% | 15% | 2% | |
| 27 | CHEUNG Henry | 4% | 22% | 39% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 28 | TURBAT Travis | - | 2% | 14% | 34% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
| 29 | KWONG Colin | 1% | 9% | 27% | 35% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 30 | TSUI Kaylan Ho Sen | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% |
| 31 | SHA Lambor（Laien) | 7% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 32 | KIM Liam | 2% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 33 | CHEN Solomon | 2% | 28% | 50% | 18% | 2% | ||
| 34 | TAN benjamin | 3% | 28% | 47% | 20% | 3% | ||
| 35 | MA Justin | 3% | 17% | 33% | 31% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 36 | CAO Benjamin | 2% | 18% | 36% | 30% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 37 | NGUYEN Nolan | 22% | 40% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 38 | BHANGOO Arman | 17% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
| 39 | DONG YIKUN | 51% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - | - | |
| 40 | CABATO Luca | 20% | 42% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 41 | CHONG Tanner | 1% | 8% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 42 | LIN Sampson | 2% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 43 | ZHU Ming | 2% | 13% | 35% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 44 | YIN Luke | 4% | 25% | 40% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 45 | LITVACK Jackson | 8% | 32% | 38% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 46 | WU Silin | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 30% | 3% |
| 47 | PARK Bryant | 6% | 49% | 38% | 7% | - | ||
| 47 | SUN Lucas | 6% | 42% | 41% | 11% | 1% | ||
| 49 | LEE Juneau | 4% | 26% | 42% | 23% | 5% | - | |
| 50 | FECK Noah | 5% | 25% | 40% | 24% | 6% | - | |
| 51 | LOZANO Koen Alexander | 2% | 18% | 36% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 52 | NGUYEN Remy | 19% | 41% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 53 | MENG Andy | 6% | 33% | 40% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 54 | MENG Eric | 18% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 55 | NGO Lincoln | 41% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 56 | FECK Shayne | 4% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 57 | GU Evan | 23% | 43% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 58 | CLIFFORD Max | 78% | 20% | 1% | - | - | ||
| 58 | KHANDAN MILAN | 73% | 24% | 3% | - | - | ||
| 60 | CHENG Alvin | 7% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 61 | KIM Ryan | 8% | 33% | 39% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 62 | CHOI Owen | 56% | 35% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 63 | THAO Zenji | 52% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 64 | XU Jiachen | 1% | 10% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 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.