Georgia Tech Campus Recreation Center: Atlanta, GA - Atlanta, GA, 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 | FULLERTON Houston T. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 78% |
2 | MODULLA Yathin R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 60% | 14% | |
3 | GLENNON Sebastian J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 32% |
3 | CHUNG Andrew | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 14% | 1% |
5 | JACKSON James | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 54% | 18% |
6 | DAVIDENKO Alexander | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 52% | 6% |
7 | CHUNG Joshua | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 27% |
8 | KULIKOWSKI Adam J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 31% | |
9 | MOORE Jeremy S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 80% |
10 | WILSON Andrew T. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 23% | 3% | |
11 | WANG Bryan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 65% | 22% | |
12 | RAVI Arjun | 100% | 96% | 70% | 32% | 7% | 1% | |
13 | LEE Winston | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 27% | 6% | 1% |
14 | LANGE Eric A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 69% | 23% | |
15 | JOHNSON Soren | 100% | 100% | 95% | 67% | 26% | 3% | - |
16 | LEE Christopher | 100% | 76% | 34% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
17 | TRACY James | 100% | 98% | 85% | 57% | 25% | 6% | 1% |
18 | NORMAN Christian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 44% | |
19 | WEISSMAN Kai E. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 51% | |
20 | LEWIS Jared | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 25% | |
21 | WANG Maxwell L. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 23% |
22 | TIEMANN Landen | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 18% |
23 | LABROZZI Aidan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 23% |
23 | REDDY Daksh | 100% | 100% | 96% | 70% | 28% | 4% | - |
25 | NGUYEN Audrey | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 28% | 5% |
26 | CREMONA Diego Maria | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 31% | 6% |
27 | LIN Kason | 100% | 99% | 85% | 50% | 16% | 2% | |
28 | VILLANI Henry M. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 56% | 18% | 2% | |
29 | WEBB Jacob T. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 71% | 28% | 4% | |
30 | NGUYEN Hubert | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 82% | 35% | 2% |
31 | FREY Wayne N. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 36% | 8% |
32 | LIU Oscar | 100% | 98% | 82% | 42% | 10% | 1% | |
33 | VALES Keyan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 57% | 14% | |
34 | NEWMAN Taylor H. | 100% | 97% | 80% | 43% | 11% | 1% | - |
35 | HERARD Weiman | 100% | 96% | 76% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - |
36 | ADIBZADEH Mehrdad | 100% | 92% | 61% | 23% | 4% | - | |
37 | KRIEGER Jack | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 57% | 18% | 2% |
38 | TEITENBERG John F. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 37% |
39 | PAL Ian K. | 100% | 95% | 75% | 42% | 14% | 2% | - |
40 | ARZT Nicholas | 100% | 99% | 85% | 45% | 11% | 1% | - |
41 | MUMMIDI Rishi | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
42 | OLIVERIUS Joseph W. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 52% |
43 | FRAGER Soleil | 100% | 91% | 61% | 24% | 4% | - | - |
44 | BALKIR Thomas | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 21% | 3% | - |
45 | BETTS Kieran | 100% | 99% | 91% | 69% | 36% | 11% | 1% |
46 | FAN Yuchen | 100% | 99% | 84% | 45% | 11% | 1% | |
47 | ZHOU Alec Q. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 31% | |
48 | BRAND Andrew | 100% | 67% | 25% | 5% | - | - | |
49 | ROCKWELL Nolan | 100% | 98% | 81% | 44% | 12% | 1% | |
50 | POBIS Chandler R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 40% |
51 | BETTS Jr Anthony P. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 46% | 11% |
52 | DONGES Anna | 100% | 99% | 88% | 54% | 17% | 2% | - |
53 | NICKERSON Oliver | 100% | 92% | 62% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - |
54 | LIU Fengqi | 100% | 100% | 97% | 76% | 35% | 6% | - |
55 | PAYNE Gareth | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 50% | 17% | 2% |
56 | PETE Landon | 100% | 97% | 82% | 52% | 21% | 5% | - |
57 | MEREDITH Jeffrey | 100% | 97% | 76% | 38% | 11% | 1% | - |
58 | BONILHA-VAN'T HOF Rafael | 100% | 100% | 96% | 69% | 25% | 4% | - |
59 | ALVIOR Jonathan Adrian | 100% | 96% | 53% | 14% | 1% | - | |
60 | HWANG Brandon | 100% | 98% | 82% | 46% | 13% | 1% | |
61 | SEEDS Aidan | 100% | 89% | 58% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
62 | BEDULLA Asher | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 7% |
63 | HAWKINS Sophia | 100% | 98% | 82% | 42% | 11% | 1% | - |
64 | OLSON Clayton M. | 100% | 96% | 80% | 48% | 18% | 3% | - |
65 | LIU Elinda | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 25% | 5% | - |
66 | ATON Dave | 100% | 99% | 89% | 58% | 20% | 3% | - |
67 | MITCHELL Philip D. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 31% | 8% | 1% |
68 | DO Joshua | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 53% | 18% | 2% |
69 | KUCIA Michael J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 36% | 2% |
70 | HARTIGAN Joe | 100% | 99% | 86% | 45% | 10% | 1% | - |
71 | DOSS matthew | 100% | 82% | 29% | 4% | - | - | - |
71 | LE BLANC Anna | 100% | 79% | 30% | 4% | - | - | - |
73 | CUPO Anthony | 100% | 97% | 83% | 54% | 24% | 6% | 1% |
74 | TAK Jemi | 100% | 82% | 42% | 11% | 1% | - | |
75 | BERNSTEIN Matthew B. | 100% | 99% | 82% | 40% | 8% | 1% | |
75 | WERTH Mario | 100% | 45% | 10% | 1% | - | - | |
77 | ZHOU alex | 100% | 94% | 60% | 19% | 3% | - | |
78 | HUANG Arthur | 100% | 44% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
79 | KHEGAY Martin | 100% | 39% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
80 | BARRETT John | 100% | 80% | 35% | 7% | - | - | - |
80 | WANG Aaron | 100% | 90% | 50% | 13% | 1% | - | - |
82 | BATISTA Julian | 100% | 99% | 84% | 47% | 13% | 1% | - |
83 | KIM Sarah | 100% | 55% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
84 | GEISSLER Maximilian | 100% | 71% | 21% | 3% | - | - | |
85 | WHITE Taylor | 100% | 95% | 68% | 28% | 5% | - | |
86 | KWON Jason | 100% | 96% | 78% | 46% | 17% | 4% | - |
87 | HUGHES Eric | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 37% | 7% | |
87 | SOKOLOWSKI Olivia | 100% | 17% | 1% | - | - | - | |
89 | SHAKULA Matvey | 100% | 40% | 7% | 1% | - | - | |
90 | CHEN Andrew | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 36% | 10% | 1% |
91 | TYMOFIEIEVA Arina | 100% | 54% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
91 | BENTON Kira | 100% | 87% | 41% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
93 | MA Victor | 100% | 75% | 34% | 8% | 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.