Fencers Club Inc. - New York, NY, 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 | TSINIS Alex | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 78% |
| 2 | MAO Benjamin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 42% |
| 3 | TABLEMAN Doug | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 28% |
| 4 | ARAVIND Athreya | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 23% |
| 5 | KNOX James | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 49% |
| 6 | PIASIO Jack | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 46% | 13% |
| 7 | CARPENTER Liam | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 44% |
| 8 | MILINKOVIC Maksim | 100% | 97% | 66% | 24% | 4% | - | - |
| 9 | CHEN Leonardo | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 51% | 12% |
| 10 | ZHAO Kuncheng | 100% | 100% | 97% | 86% | 58% | 24% | 4% |
| 11 | GUO Austin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 76% | 13% |
| 12 | LIOU Solomon | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 25% |
| 13 | NORMILE Nicholas | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 53% | 14% |
| 14 | GAO Victor | 100% | 91% | 61% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 15 | DURKIN Hudson | 100% | 99% | 81% | 40% | 8% | - | - |
| 16 | EVANS Grant | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 32% | 9% | 1% |
| 17 | KARIMOV Amir | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 48% | 12% | 1% |
| 18 | SWENSON Keane | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 42% | 8% |
| 19 | NG Nico | 100% | 94% | 72% | 36% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 20 | DANIEL Camron | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 53% | 15% |
| 21 | SHEFFIELD Lake Mawu | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 82% | 49% | 14% |
| 22 | COHEN Jared | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 54% | 21% | 3% |
| 23 | BOUDREAUX James | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 78% | 44% | 11% |
| 24 | DURKIN Tristan | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 61% | 23% | 3% |
| 25 | ZHAI Junqi | 100% | 87% | 52% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 26 | RIM Eugene | 100% | 99% | 88% | 58% | 22% | 4% | - |
| 27 | WU Jerry | 100% | 90% | 59% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 28 | REPIC Oliver | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 45% | 7% | - |
| 29 | HU Robert | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 26% | 3% |
| 30 | ZENG Andrew | 100% | 99% | 88% | 58% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 31 | COETZEE Frans | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 52% | 20% | 3% |
| 32 | CHEN Jayden | 100% | 97% | 80% | 45% | 13% | 1% | - |
| 33 | WONG Maximus | 100% | 99% | 88% | 57% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 34 | BUACHIE Aaron | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 14% | 1% |
| 35 | KYPRAIOS Nicholas | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 38% | 11% | 1% |
| 36 | YIN Chujun | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
| 37 | LI Jade | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 24% | 5% | - |
| 38 | CHOU-ESTEBAN Pau | 100% | 99% | 89% | 54% | 15% | 1% | - |
| 39 | PIERCE Aaron | 100% | 96% | 79% | 45% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 40 | KNIPSCHER Riley | 100% | 91% | 63% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 41 | DOUBOV Andrew | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 49% | 16% | 2% |
| 42 | HURWITZ Daniel | 100% | 96% | 76% | 43% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 42 | ALEXANDER Christopher | 100% | 92% | 64% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 44 | SUBRAMANIAM Sahil | 100% | 88% | 55% | 21% | 5% | - | - |
| 45 | FERRAIOLO James | 100% | 95% | 72% | 37% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 46 | BOUCHACOURT Arthur | 100% | 89% | 56% | 22% | 5% | - | - |
| 47 | CHEMAKIN Maxim | 100% | 63% | 22% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 48 | MAKOLO Hudson | 100% | 77% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 49 | ACAR Devin | 100% | 96% | 75% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 50 | LEE Henry | 100% | 80% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 51 | NUNEZ Jorge | 100% | 95% | 71% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 51 | LAU LUCAS | 100% | 81% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 53 | LIU Fengqi | 100% | 92% | 60% | 22% | 4% | - | - |
| 54 | WU Pingchien | 100% | 74% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | RIFKIND Neil | 100% | 78% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 56 | CHEN Jayden | 100% | 25% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
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.