Intercontinental - Los Angeles Hotel - Los Angeles, 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 | KOVALEV Daniil N. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 26% |
| 2 | CAO Oliver | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 35% | 7% |
| 3 | ANDRES Michael | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 25% |
| 3 | KOVACHEV Martin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 23% | 3% |
| 5 | YAP Kah Kai (Cayden) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 35% |
| 6 | ROSALES Vincent | 100% | 98% | 86% | 58% | 25% | 6% | 1% |
| 7 | GU Kevin | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 8 | KANG Evan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 41% |
| 9 | ZHAO Zhiyu(Yogi) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 37% |
| 10 | CHAN Aidan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 35% | 6% |
| 11 | XIAO Brayden | 100% | 99% | 89% | 63% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
| 11 | LI Yidong A. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 27% | 6% | 1% |
| 13 | TANI Tino | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 47% | 13% |
| 14 | SU Kingston | 100% | 97% | 81% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 15 | CHEN Cooper | 100% | 95% | 73% | 39% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 16 | WEINBERG Harry | 100% | 100% | 94% | 73% | 37% | 10% | 1% |
| 17 | GILSHTEYN Jacob | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 22% |
| 18 | CHOW William T. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 20% |
| 19 | COBIAN Richard | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 27% | 6% | 1% |
| 20 | ZENG Vito | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 48% | 16% | 2% |
| 21 | GREMILLION Obadiah | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 54% | 17% |
| 21 | LI AYDEN | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 31% | 6% |
| 23 | WANG Tiger | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 22% | 3% |
| 24 | SUNG Julian | 100% | 98% | 84% | 53% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 25 | GIANETTO Ethan K. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 29% | 5% |
| 26 | VENKATRAMAN Sudhir | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 27 | HONG Arick | 100% | 75% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 28 | HONG Aidan | 100% | 97% | 81% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 29 | TUNG Ryan | 100% | 99% | 95% | 77% | 44% | 15% | 2% |
| 30 | KIM Ryan | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 34% | 9% | 1% |
| 31 | LEE Brian | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 52% | 19% | 2% |
| 32 | LEE Brandon | 100% | 70% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 33 | YANG Phillip | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 13% |
| 34 | WANG HongXi | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 41% | 13% | 2% |
| 35 | CAO Donald | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 67% | 32% | 7% |
| 35 | WINTERSET Mason | 100% | 96% | 76% | 43% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 37 | FRENCILLO Daryl | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 35% | 7% |
| 38 | LEIGH Edward | 100% | 96% | 75% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 39 | KULKARNI Shreyas | 100% | 82% | 44% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 40 | LIU Daniel | 100% | 92% | 62% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
| 41 | SINGHAL Armaan | 100% | 96% | 76% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 42 | EKAMBARAM Nikhil | 100% | 89% | 58% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 43 | CHI Everett | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 44 | HENRY Ethan | 100% | 98% | 83% | 51% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 45 | BUI Joseph | 100% | 89% | 54% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 46 | VOSPER James | 100% | 82% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 47 | TIAN Zimo | 100% | 58% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 48 | SEELMAN Cole | 100% | 94% | 70% | 36% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 48 | LIAO Yifong | 100% | 84% | 49% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 50 | VO Landon | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 32% | 8% | 1% |
| 51 | LI linze | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 39% | 11% | 1% |
| 52 | LIU Yijin | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 53 | LIU Ziyi | 100% | 97% | 83% | 52% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 54 | JOUFFLINEAU Yohann | 100% | 95% | 75% | 41% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 55 | KATZ Nico | 100% | 69% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 56 | HWANG Jayden | 100% | 82% | 42% | 11% | 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.