Burlington, NJ - Burlington, NJ, 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 | CHENG Jonathan | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 37% | 54% |
2 | HOOSHI Jayden C. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 41% | 22% |
3 | MARX Oscar L. | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 50% | 33% |
3 | GEOGHEGAN Ronan | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 4% |
5 | LI Owen | - | - | 4% | 21% | 44% | 30% | |
6 | DOCTOR Aidan L. | - | - | 1% | 10% | 39% | 49% | |
7 | LI Richard | - | - | - | - | 7% | 36% | 57% |
8 | PAE Jonathan L. | - | - | - | 3% | 19% | 45% | 32% |
9 | LIANG Lixi (Henry) | - | - | - | - | 6% | 33% | 61% |
10 | RUSADZE Nickolas | - | - | - | 5% | 26% | 46% | 22% |
11 | PAE Brian L. | - | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 39% | 16% |
12 | DAI Jonathan T. | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 40% | 41% |
13 | GRAHAM Roy J. | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 46% | 38% |
14 | AHN Jun | - | 1% | 6% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 8% |
15 | BRUK Peter J. | - | - | 2% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 21% |
16 | AUGUSTINE Aaron A. | 2% | 18% | 43% | 29% | 7% | - | |
17 | ANTON Nathaniel | - | - | 1% | 9% | 34% | 44% | 12% |
18 | TOLBA Abdelrahman | - | - | 2% | 11% | 34% | 42% | 11% |
19 | ORVANANOS Jorge | - | 1% | 14% | 40% | 37% | 8% | |
20 | PO Oliver | - | 2% | 14% | 36% | 36% | 11% | |
21 | MARX Jackson L. | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 6% |
22 | TSIMIKLIS Yanni | - | - | 7% | 29% | 43% | 19% | 2% |
23 | GUO Sean | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
24 | LI Ayren | 18% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
25 | BASOK Nikita | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 2% |
26 | WU Alexander | - | 3% | 19% | 41% | 30% | 6% | |
27 | ZHEN Ethan | - | - | 4% | 23% | 43% | 25% | 4% |
28 | HONG Issac | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 10% | 1% |
29 | JIANG Owen | - | 4% | 19% | 39% | 32% | 7% | - |
30 | TORRES Treston | 16% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
31 | OTTO Nathaniel B. | 1% | 13% | 44% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - |
32 | ACHILOV Sayid | 2% | 14% | 31% | 32% | 16% | 4% | - |
33 | LI Yao (Liam) | - | 4% | 20% | 41% | 28% | 7% | - |
34 | LIN James G. | - | - | 4% | 21% | 41% | 29% | 4% |
35 | PROMRAT Pete | 1% | 17% | 38% | 32% | 11% | 1% | - |
36 | WANG Jackson | 1% | 10% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 5% | - |
37 | XU Andy P. | - | - | 3% | 20% | 42% | 29% | 4% |
38 | ZHOU Leon | 6% | 31% | 44% | 16% | 2% | - | - |
39 | LI Aaron | - | 3% | 20% | 44% | 28% | 5% | - |
40 | LI Jinghua E. | 11% | 33% | 34% | 17% | 4% | 1% | - |
41 | SONG Bryan | 1% | 9% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 5% | |
42 | TRAUGOT Owen G. | 7% | 30% | 39% | 20% | 4% | - | |
43 | CHEN Kyle P. | - | 3% | 19% | 42% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
44 | TAHOUN Mostafa | 2% | 15% | 36% | 34% | 12% | 1% | - |
45 | GUO Justin | 4% | 24% | 40% | 26% | 6% | - | - |
46 | KNIZHNIK David | 8% | 41% | 39% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
47 | ORLOV Dmitriy | 15% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
48 | MALHAM Andrew | 23% | 44% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
49 | MENG Zhaoyi | 3% | 20% | 40% | 28% | 8% | 1% | |
50 | PEDERSEN Charles | 44% | 41% | 13% | 2% | - | - | |
51 | KOVACS Wyatt | 31% | 46% | 20% | 3% | - | - | |
52 | MASTROPAOLO Jonah W. | 22% | 50% | 24% | 4% | - | - | - |
53 | HESS Jason | 1% | 11% | 31% | 37% | 17% | 3% | - |
54 | KLYCZEK Andrew | 43% | 40% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
55 | XU Ethan | 2% | 15% | 34% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - |
55 | TIKHAEV Alexander | 11% | 37% | 36% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
57 | KLOTZ Isaiah | 10% | 31% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
58 | ZHUANG Chuanxuan | 9% | 32% | 37% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
58 | LIU Derek | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% |
60 | WANG mason | 20% | 40% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
61 | XIANG Derrick | 3% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - |
62 | LEE Jonah | 1% | 8% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 5% | - |
63 | LIEW Jeremy K. | 7% | 28% | 37% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - |
64 | ZHANG zican | 56% | 36% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
65 | WANG Julang | 16% | 42% | 34% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
66 | CHOO Christopher Y. | 30% | 49% | 18% | 2% | - | - | |
67 | LIU Ryan | 56% | 35% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
68 | SANDHU LERNER Armaan S. | 53% | 41% | 6% | - | - | - | - |
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.