Southwest Recreation Center - Gainesville, FL, 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 | IRWIN Peter | - | - | - | - | 4% | 31% | 65% |
2 | SCHENCK Koen M. | - | - | - | 1% | 13% | 49% | 37% |
3 | JACKSON James | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 38% | 13% | |
3 | LIDSKY Phineas | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 25% |
5 | ALVIOR Joshua Aethan B. | - | - | - | 4% | 29% | 67% | |
6 | KELLEY Hayden | - | 4% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 2% |
7 | NGUYEN Audrey | - | 5% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 9% | 1% |
8 | MUMMIDI Rishi | - | 3% | 13% | 30% | 34% | 17% | 3% |
9 | ALVIOR Jacob A. | - | 1% | 7% | 28% | 43% | 21% | |
9 | SHIVELY Cole T. | 4% | 21% | 38% | 29% | 9% | 1% | |
11 | DUPREE Thomas | - | - | 1% | 15% | 51% | 33% | |
12 | CHENG Thomas | - | - | 2% | 13% | 43% | 35% | 6% |
13 | FULLERTON Joshua D. | - | 1% | 11% | 47% | 35% | 6% | |
14 | KOSSMANN Alexander | - | - | 3% | 18% | 42% | 35% | |
15 | RASSEL John | - | 3% | 18% | 36% | 30% | 11% | 2% |
16 | TYSON Charlie | - | - | 1% | 9% | 34% | 46% | 10% |
17 | SALLAM Omar | - | - | 2% | 10% | 31% | 42% | 15% |
18 | DINKINS Adam | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 37% | 26% | 6% |
19 | FREY Wayne N. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 23% |
20 | CLAYTON Robert | - | - | - | 4% | 46% | 50% | |
21 | ZHOU Alec Q. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 33% | 59% | |
22 | RODDENBERRY Steven | 2% | 16% | 38% | 33% | 10% | 1% | - |
23 | OLSON Clayton M. | 4% | 18% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 2% | - |
24 | ADIBZADEH Mehrdad | 4% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 7% | 1% | |
25 | FRAGER Soleil | 1% | 11% | 39% | 36% | 12% | 1% | |
26 | ALVIOR Jonathan Adrian | 1% | 7% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 5% | - |
27 | BEATTY Thomas | - | 5% | 25% | 43% | 22% | 4% | - |
28 | KARPF Jonah | 5% | 29% | 41% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
29 | SEEDS Aidan | 2% | 19% | 53% | 24% | 3% | - | |
30 | WYNN Paul | 1% | 10% | 31% | 39% | 17% | 2% | |
31 | SLOTER Lewis E. | 1% | 11% | 30% | 37% | 18% | 2% | |
32 | STEPHENSON William | 9% | 32% | 38% | 18% | 4% | - | |
33 | SIENRA Xabier | 1% | 7% | 25% | 40% | 25% | 3% | |
34 | RODA Thaleia | 14% | 42% | 32% | 10% | 2% | - | |
35 | BATISTA Julian | - | 2% | 17% | 46% | 33% | 3% | |
36 | DASILVA Mia | - | 5% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 9% | 1% |
37 | PACILIO Jacob | - | - | 4% | 19% | 37% | 31% | 9% |
38 | LOPEZ Lincoln | - | 2% | 17% | 36% | 31% | 12% | 2% |
39 | ARIANAS Elias | 1% | 6% | 19% | 32% | 28% | 12% | 2% |
40 | HUSZAR Sara | - | 4% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 7% | |
41 | HAWKINS Sophia | 1% | 10% | 37% | 43% | 9% | - | |
42 | GUO Lucas | 1% | 33% | 46% | 18% | 2% | - | |
43 | LE BLANC Anna | 7% | 51% | 36% | 6% | - | - | |
44 | HERARD Weiman | 10% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
45 | NARANJO Andrew | 38% | 42% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
46 | BAINO Lorenzo | - | 3% | 14% | 30% | 33% | 17% | 3% |
47 | RAUDALES Nicolas | - | 3% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 2% |
48 | WERTH Mario | - | 5% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 9% | - |
49 | CULLEN Reilly | 7% | 32% | 39% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
50 | MCFARLAND John G. | - | 25% | 47% | 25% | 3% | - | |
51 | COATES Gregory | 4% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 11% | 1% | |
52 | GREGORY Aedan | 6% | 29% | 38% | 21% | 5% | - | |
53 | CARRERO Quentin | 29% | 43% | 22% | 5% | - | - | |
54 | BENTON Kira | 1% | 11% | 31% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - |
55 | HART Justin | 26% | 46% | 24% | 5% | - | - | - |
56 | LANGUASCO Michael | 1% | 9% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 3% | - |
56 | BEST Sydney | 3% | 19% | 36% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
58 | HUANG Arthur | 23% | 49% | 23% | 4% | - | - | - |
59 | GRIFFITHS Wesley | 11% | 36% | 36% | 15% | 2% | - | |
60 | MOSCOSO SERRANO Andrea | 49% | 40% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
61 | GUADAMUZ Cesar | 9% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
62 | SAYER Laura | 66% | 30% | 4% | - | - | - | |
62 | NGUYEN Catarina | 81% | 18% | 1% | - | - | - | |
64 | PHAM Hailey | 74% | 23% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
65 | CHAVARIN Alessandro | 44% | 43% | 12% | 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.