Belleville High School - Belleville, MI, USA
Color shade indicates the magnitude of a surprise (positive or negative). Grey means no suprise. Read more.
| # | Name | Bout Difficulty vs. Outcome * | Pool Victories | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pool | DE | Exp. | Act. | Diff. | ||
| 1 | BROOKS Zachary B. | V V V V V D | V V V V V | 5.4 | 5 | -0.4 |
| 2 | KANAR Ian | V V V V V V | V V V V D | 5.2 | 6 | +0.8 |
| 3 | JONES Reilly | V V V V V | V V V D | 3.5 | 5 | +1.5 |
| 3 | SERAFYM Damian | D V V V V V | V V V D | 4.3 | 5 | +0.7 |
| 5 | KIM Sterling S. | V V V V V V | V V D | 4.3 | 6 | +1.7 |
| 6 | MCDONNELL Michael | V V V V V | V V D | 2.8 | 5 | +2.2 |
| 7 | CAMP Ethan | V V D V V V | V V D | 3.9 | 5 | +1.1 |
| 8 | BECKER Thomas | V V V D V V | V V D | 5.5 | 5 | -0.5 |
| 9 | SNELL Andrew J. | V V V V V D | V D | 4.5 | 5 | +0.5 |
| 10 | SCHRANK Mitchell | V V V V D | V D | 4.1 | 4 | -0.1 |
| 11 | TOWNSEND George | V D V V V | V V D | 3.5 | 4 | +0.5 |
| 12 | LI Peizhen (Daniel) | V V D V V | V V D | 3.1 | 4 | +0.9 |
| 13 | DEPAUW Devan | V D D V V | V V D | 3.0 | 3 | - |
| 14 | BETTS Jr Anthony P. | V D V D V V | V V D | 3.3 | 4 | +0.7 |
| 15 | MARSHALL John W. | D D V V V | V D | 4.4 | 3 | -1.4 |
| 16 | JOBE Connor | V D V V D | V V D | 2.3 | 3 | +0.7 |
| 17 | SCHULTZ Gillian | V D V V V V | D | 2.8 | 5 | +2.2 |
| 18 | DIETZ Tommy | V V V V D | V D | 3.2 | 4 | +0.8 |
| 19 | OCHS Bradley C. | V D V D V V | V D | 3.9 | 4 | +0.1 |
| 20 | ALABI Azryl | V V D D V | V D | 1.2 | 3 | +1.8 |
| 21 | NORCONK Claire R. | D V V D V | V D | 2.8 | 3 | +0.2 |
| 22 | SAYLOR Henry | V D D D V V | V D | 1.8 | 3 | +1.2 |
| 23 | ECKEL Anson J. | V V V D D D | V D | 4.7 | 3 | -1.7 |
| 24 | BROWN Amanda | D D V V V D | V D | 3.0 | 3 | - |
| 25 | LAPP J P | V D D V D V | V D | 2.7 | 3 | +0.3 |
| 26 | RODACHY Jeffrey M. | D D V V D | V D | 3.0 | 2 | -1.0 |
| 27 | SHELVEN Jr. Lawrence E. | D V D V D | V D | 2.1 | 2 | -0.1 |
| 28 | AYAR Riley | D D V D D | V D | 1.4 | 1 | -0.4 |
| 29 | SCHULTZ Michelle M. | D D V D D V | V D | 1.1 | 2 | +0.9 |
| 30 | ADAM Cristian | D V D V D D | V D | 2.9 | 2 | -0.9 |
| 31 | WALSH Christopher J. | D V D D D D | V D | 3.5 | 1 | -2.5 |
| 32 | METZ Evan | D D D D D | V D | 1.1 | 0 | -1.1 |
| 33 | ZHANG James | V V D D V V | D | 4.1 | 4 | -0.1 |
| 34 | BOLAKOWSKI John M. | V V D V D | D | 3.2 | 3 | -0.2 |
| 35 | DEPAUW Adeline | V V D V D D | D | 1.8 | 3 | +1.2 |
| 36 | JANYSKA Allen | D D V D V | D | 2.2 | 2 | -0.2 |
| 37 | SAYLOR Nathaniel | V D D D V | D | 0.8 | 2 | +1.2 |
| 38 | ZHANG Michael | D V D D V | D | 2.8 | 2 | -0.8 |
| 39 | ADAMISIN Brayden | D V V D D | D | 2.6 | 2 | -0.6 |
| 40 | LIU Quincy | D V D D D V | D | 2.5 | 2 | -0.5 |
| 41 | WANG Kaiyan | D D D V D | D | 1.4 | 1 | -0.4 |
| 42 | CACCAMO Nicholas | D V D V D D | D | 3.2 | 2 | -1.2 |
| 43 | OXIE Matthew | D D V V D D | D | 1.5 | 2 | +0.5 |
| 44 | STAUBITZ Marc | D D V D V D | D | 2.4 | 2 | -0.4 |
| 45 | APANASEWICZ Dan | V D D D D | D | 1.2 | 1 | -0.2 |
| 46 | KLINE R. Jay | D D V D D | D | 2.3 | 1 | -1.3 |
| 48 | WILTSE Alexander | D D V D D D | D | 2.0 | 1 | -1.0 |
| 49 | KOCSIS Cherry | D D D D V D | D | 0.7 | 1 | +0.3 |
| 50 | HOLDORF LE GOFF Bianca | D D D D D | D | 2.0 | 0 | -2.0 |
| 51 | ZEHE Michele A. | D D D D D D | D | 0.9 | 0 | -0.9 |
| 52 | JAGROO Mary | D D D D D D | D | 1.7 | 0 | -1.7 |
| 53 | DUTTON Kimberly | D D D D D D | D | 0.4 | 0 | -0.4 |
Color coded boxes represent the outcome against opponents of varying difficulty levels from the perspective of the fencer. Letters inside the boxes indicate victory (V) and defeat (D).
| Color | Outcome | Opponent's Difficulty | Probability of Victory |
|---|---|---|---|
| Victory | Very Hard | 0% to 20% | |
| Victory | Hard | 20% to 40% | |
| Victory | Roughly Even | 40% to 60% | |
| Victory | Easy | 60% to 80% | |
| Victory | Very Easy | 80% to 100% | |
| Defeat | Very Hard | 0% to 20% | |
| Defeat | Hard | 20% to 40% | |
| Defeat | Roughly Even | 40% to 60% | |
| Defeat | Easy | 60% to 80% | |
| Defeat | Very Easy | 80% to 100% |
The visual cues provided in this table highlight bouts that may be considered surprises based on the relative strengths of the competitors:
This visualization is designed to give both fencers and spectators an immediate sense of the unexpected outcomes of the competition. While every bout has its unique circumstances, these indicators can help highlight moments where a fencer overcame the odds or where there was an unexpected turn of events.