Los Angeles Convention Center - 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 | KALLIO Jeffrey E. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 48% | |
| 2 | ZHU Shirui | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 33% | 8% | 1% |
| 3 | MATT Chris | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 55% | |
| 3 | BACON Michael F. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 79% | 29% | |
| 5 | ESCUETA Jr Tony V. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 54% | 13% |
| 6 | FERRARO Pietro | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 51% | 14% |
| 7 | ZIRKLE James | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 37% | 9% | 1% |
| 8 | BAILEY-YAVONDITTE Daniel C. | 100% | 89% | 53% | 15% | 1% | - | |
| 9 | CHU Kevin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 67% | 22% |
| 10 | VINTILA Radu | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 36% | 6% |
| 11 | HERRERA Richard K. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 30% | |
| 12 | CHANG William | 100% | 91% | 61% | 25% | 5% | - | |
| 13 | THORNTON Ronald J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 49% |
| 14 | PLONKA Derek | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 22% | |
| 15 | MAKOGON Sergey | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 64% | 17% | |
| 16 | WAXLER Aaron M. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 15% | 1% | |
| 17 | BUSH Joshua C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 85% | 41% | |
| 17 | TERENTIEV Max | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 16% | |
| 19 | MAUREL Nicolas | 100% | 99% | 90% | 59% | 22% | 4% | - |
| 20 | PHILLIPS Kim V. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 55% |
| 21 | ZOLLER Matthew | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 17% | 2% |
| 22 | PENTON Robert | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 67% | 23% |
| 23 | RUNYAN Joshua | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 42% | |
| 24 | JIANG Edison | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 21% | 3% | |
| 25 | CRETEN joachim | 100% | 98% | 76% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 26 | ZHONG Meng | 100% | 82% | 39% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 27 | WANG Albert | 100% | 69% | 25% | 4% | - | - | |
| 28 | KRASNICH Mike | 100% | 99% | 85% | 43% | 8% | 1% | |
| 29 | LILLARD Samuel N. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 36% | 7% |
| 30 | SEGALE William J. | 100% | 41% | 4% | - | - | - | |
| 31 | PARAGANO Vincent | 100% | 95% | 72% | 34% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 32 | STONE Brad | 100% | 56% | 16% | 2% | - | - | |
| 33 | TSUNG David | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 25% | 3% |
| 34 | KASTOR Jacaeber | 100% | 100% | 100% | 91% | 50% | 10% | |
| 35 | LARA Alfred | 100% | 99% | 91% | 55% | 13% | 1% | |
| 36 | CHEN Brian | 100% | 99% | 85% | 51% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 37 | PARK James | 100% | 97% | 78% | 41% | 12% | 1% | |
| 38 | DASHNAW Stephen | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 60% | 20% |
| 39 | DHAR asif | 100% | 88% | 46% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 40 | REMETE Tomas | 100% | 73% | 15% | 1% | - | - | |
| 41 | CHO Yutong | 100% | 98% | 83% | 48% | 15% | 2% | |
| 42 | MCLAUGHLIN Joseph R. | 100% | 97% | 76% | 39% | 10% | 1% | |
| 43 | GUEBLE Jeffrey R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 45% | 8% |
| 44 | FIALKOWSKI Steven P. | 100% | 97% | 72% | 32% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 45 | BAKER Keith L. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 57% | 17% | 2% | - |
| 46 | ERIKSON Steven | 100% | 59% | 17% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 47 | CHANG Henry | 100% | 95% | 65% | 24% | 4% | - | - |
| 48 | MIGHELL Jason | 100% | 91% | 61% | 25% | 5% | - | |
| 49 | WANG Xiaodong | 100% | 97% | 78% | 37% | 5% | - | |
| 50 | MOODY Paul J. | 100% | 91% | 55% | 15% | 1% | - | |
| 51 | DIRSMITH Benjamin J. | 100% | 93% | 67% | 31% | 7% | - | |
| 52 | MARTINEZ Mario Martinez D. | 100% | 78% | 27% | 4% | - | - | |
| 53 | MILLS Matthew P. | 100% | 51% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
| 54 | HICHA Paul R. | 100% | 99% | 84% | 28% | 4% | - | |
| 55 | COGAN Derek | 100% | 95% | 66% | 24% | 3% | - | - |
| 56 | SMITH Dennis | 100% | 34% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 57 | RYBKIN Alexander V. | 100% | 75% | 32% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 58 | GOLOVITSER Alex | 100% | 39% | 6% | 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.