New Haven, CT - New Haven, CT, 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 | LEHR William D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 45% | 11% |
2 | LESPERANCE Lucas | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 39% |
3 | DYER Ian E. | 100% | 98% | 81% | 46% | 15% | 2% | |
3 | HERMANSON David B. | 100% | 96% | 73% | 36% | 10% | 1% | |
5 | SOOMRO Adam A. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 33% | 6% | |
6 | JIN Owen | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 24% |
7 | LIEF Isaac R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 30% | 5% |
8 | GOLDFINE Ian J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 29% |
9 | BELLIVEAU Raven C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 29% | |
10 | MCDERMOTT Brian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 72% | 25% |
11 | SHAH Maximilian A. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 48% | 16% | 2% |
12 | COLLYMORE Spencer T. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 58% | 19% | |
13 | LEE Noah | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 27% |
14 | RICHARD Owen | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 42% | 9% | |
15 | EKE Frank | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 32% | 6% |
16 | PIERANUNZI IV Wills | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 75% | 40% | 10% |
17 | GALLANT Antoine | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 43% |
18 | HE Lawrence | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 25% | |
19 | WU Joseph | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 37% | 9% | 1% |
20 | JIN Alexander | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 14% |
21 | HA Daniel | 100% | 98% | 78% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - |
22 | MORTON William | 100% | 92% | 57% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
23 | BAZURO Andrew | 100% | 99% | 84% | 50% | 18% | 3% | - |
24 | SMEDLEY Drew N. | 100% | 92% | 65% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
25 | DOTSON Gus | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 44% | |
26 | MACARTY Jordan T. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 31% | 6% | |
26 | LANGTON Sawyer | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 38% | 7% | |
28 | MCCOMISKEY Aiden J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 30% | |
29 | LAI Coby | 100% | 97% | 71% | 31% | 7% | 1% | |
30 | JANKOWICH Alexander E. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 50% | 13% | 1% |
31 | SIMPSON Patrick | 100% | 98% | 83% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - |
32 | SKIFFINGTON Sam | 100% | 95% | 72% | 34% | 8% | 1% | |
33 | HANRATTY Liam | 100% | 99% | 88% | 52% | 15% | 1% | |
34 | BORODITSKY Ethan | 100% | 100% | 92% | 65% | 27% | 4% | |
35 | KARAMANIAN Nicholas | 100% | 96% | 75% | 35% | 7% | 1% | |
36 | GROSSMAN August | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 17% | 3% |
37 | PRIHODKO Max | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 14% | 2% | - |
38 | COTAJ Andrew | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 21% | 4% | - |
39 | STEVENS George | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 30% | 7% | 1% |
40 | PAHLAVI Kamran | 100% | 95% | 72% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - |
41 | WIEDERHORN ethan | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 34% | 7% | |
42 | GAO Daniel | 100% | 93% | 64% | 25% | 4% | - | - |
43 | REINEKE Alexander | 100% | 89% | 51% | 12% | 1% | - | |
44 | BRUNNER Dylan J. | 100% | 80% | 40% | 10% | 1% | - | |
45 | MATEI Daniel | 100% | 99% | 84% | 48% | 14% | 2% | |
46 | ROLLO Emmett H. | 100% | 87% | 41% | 9% | 1% | - | |
47 | HERBERT Harrison | 100% | 81% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
48 | FERREIRA Noah J. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 28% | 6% | 1% |
49 | CONNELLY Asa D. | 100% | 92% | 63% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - |
50 | PAGE Duncan | 100% | 80% | 39% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
51 | BARSEMIAN Alexander | 100% | 82% | 43% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
52 | PAPAVASSILIOU Christos | 100% | 96% | 76% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - |
53 | FLECKENSTEIN Benjamin T. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 57% | 23% | 4% |
54 | AMELOT Alexander | 100% | 34% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
55 | ZHANG William | 100% | 45% | 8% | 1% | - | - | |
55 | STALL-RYAN Jonathan | 100% | 56% | 16% | 2% | - | - | |
57 | STEWART Charlie | 100% | 86% | 50% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
58 | CONNORS Jacob | 100% | 32% | 4% | - | - | - | |
59 | GIRARDI Brian | 100% | 62% | 21% | 4% | - | - | - |
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.