University of Arizona - Tucson, AZ, 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 | NORBUTAS Jackson S. | - | - | - | - | 1% | 17% | 82% |
| 2 | BOYCE Samuel H. | - | - | - | 1% | 12% | 40% | 47% |
| 3 | YAN Ho Lam | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 42% | 19% | 2% |
| 3 | RITTER Clayton | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 34% | 59% |
| 5 | KARAMAGA Ganza | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 40% | 21% | 2% |
| 6 | SANKEY Levi | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 11% |
| 7 | ISHERWOOD Bryan C. | - | - | - | 3% | 15% | 40% | 42% |
| 8 | CHOY LeeAnn | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 43% | 33% |
| 9 | BALDWIN Alexander | - | 2% | 16% | 37% | 33% | 11% | 1% |
| 10 | FOWLER James A. | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 34% | 58% |
| 11 | BRECHTEL James | - | - | 2% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 22% |
| 12 | TIEMANN Landen | - | - | - | 4% | 32% | 52% | 11% |
| 13 | SANKEY Luka | - | 2% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 5% |
| 14 | YAN Wing Yu | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 36% | 18% | 3% |
| 15 | COLLINS Vernon | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 43% | 26% | |
| 16 | FOISSET Jacob | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 39% | 24% | 4% |
| 17 | WILLIAMS Timothy | 1% | 15% | 39% | 32% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 18 | WALLIS Wyatt | 2% | 14% | 36% | 35% | 12% | 1% | |
| 19 | HERRON Jonathan | 5% | 24% | 39% | 26% | 6% | 1% | |
| 20 | MANDEL Christian | - | - | 3% | 21% | 48% | 25% | 3% |
| 21 | VENET Téva | - | - | 2% | 14% | 39% | 40% | 5% |
| 22 | PUTTAMRAJU Nikhil | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 23 | LAURSEN Logan | 1% | 8% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 4% | - |
| 24 | ORELUP Austin | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 7% |
| 25 | CONWAY Collin | 1% | 7% | 28% | 40% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 25 | LOUIE Joseph | - | - | 5% | 24% | 40% | 25% | 5% |
| 27 | DAVIS Julia | 6% | 47% | 35% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 28 | SCHWENK Cody D. | 3% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 28 | PABLO Jesse | 2% | 16% | 43% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 30 | PABLO Sebastian | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 39% | 24% | 4% |
| 31 | CHENOWETH Zachary | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% |
| 32 | DUNCAN Nicholas | 21% | 58% | 19% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 33 | FESTIN Michael G. | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% |
| 34 | SMITH Samuel J. | - | 6% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 35 | HOWIE Ryan | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 36 | IRVING David | - | 5% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 7% | - |
| 37 | HEWITT Frank F. | 1% | 8% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 5% | |
| 38 | ROLDAN Ethan | 36% | 43% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 39 | BLUM Chaston | - | 2% | 11% | 31% | 36% | 17% | 3% |
| 40 | SANDIRI Shanmukh Rishith | 1% | 29% | 41% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 41 | ANDERSON Donald | 2% | 13% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 42 | BEATY Trace | 2% | 15% | 33% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 43 | MARIKOS Christina | 51% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 44 | WOLCOTT Charlie A. | - | 7% | 29% | 38% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 45 | RUVALCABA jesus | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 39% | 18% | 2% |
| 46 | MORGAN Elijah | 1% | 7% | 27% | 40% | 22% | 3% | - |
| 47 | FELDMAN Louis | 25% | 47% | 24% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 48 | EASTWOOD Darin | 1% | 9% | 38% | 48% | 4% | - | - |
| 49 | CHAIRES Ryan | 2% | 13% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 3% | |
| 50 | NUNEZ Alexa | 2% | 18% | 37% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 51 | WHITAKER Lauren | 50% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 52 | BARVICK Kathleen | 62% | 32% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 53 | REYES genesis | 7% | 29% | 39% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 54 | CHEN Yuan | 28% | 43% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | PACHECO Ethaniel | 2% | 15% | 33% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 56 | TAARIQ Tanisha | 26% | 42% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 57 | KELLEHER Cash | 12% | 57% | 26% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 58 | RAMIREZ danika | 15% | 37% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 59 | CAVAZOS Sophia | 7% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 60 | TORRES Jacquelyn | 2% | 15% | 43% | 31% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 61 | LABANT sophia | 8% | 31% | 38% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
| 62 | SANTACRUZ Alejandra | 6% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 7% | 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.