Liontree Arena (RIMAC) @ UC San Diego - La Jolla, 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 | CHIRASHNYA Daniel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 74% | 30% |
| 2 | ABZHANOV Nurzhan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 75% | 30% |
| 3 | SHARMA Sanil | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 68% | 23% |
| 3 | DIECK Logan O. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 73% | 31% |
| 5 | KHAYAT Ziad N. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 40% |
| 6 | WANG Joey | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 18% | 2% |
| 7 | WONG Baron | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 27% | 4% |
| 8 | KIM Sterling S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 47% | 10% |
| 9 | BRISLAWN Reilly R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 56% |
| 10 | CHIEN Brandon | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 17% |
| 11 | ERLIKHMAN Adrian | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 25% | 4% |
| 11 | ROBINSON Samuel | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 54% | 20% | 3% |
| 13 | YAO Geoffrey B. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 60% | 15% | |
| 14 | TAI Edison | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 27% | 5% |
| 15 | WU Steven | 100% | 99% | 85% | 45% | 10% | 1% | |
| 16 | WILKENS Zach Q. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 35% | 6% |
| 17 | CHOI Zachary | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 45% | 9% |
| 18 | YAMASAKI Kyle A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 19% |
| 19 | KHANNA Nikhil | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 56% | 17% |
| 20 | KIM Sullivan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 86% | 48% | 11% |
| 21 | KIM Benjamin I. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 77% | 26% | |
| 22 | DILLON Anik | 100% | 98% | 76% | 33% | 5% | - | |
| 23 | CLAWSON Brian C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 91% | 50% | 13% | 1% |
| 24 | DU Shunyu K. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 39% | 11% | 1% |
| 25 | YU Austin | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 48% | 16% | 2% |
| 26 | POLAKOSKI David R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 40% |
| 27 | MENDOZA Zandro | 100% | 100% | 96% | 70% | 29% | 6% | - |
| 28 | JOHNSTON Conner S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 24% |
| 29 | LEE Royce | 100% | 94% | 68% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 30 | SANKEY Luka | 100% | 91% | 59% | 23% | 4% | - | - |
| 31 | ROBITZSKI Daniel A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 92% | 64% | 24% | 3% |
| 31 | MORIN-JIANG Jake | 100% | 100% | 96% | 74% | 31% | 6% | - |
| 33 | GOHEL Dayus T. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 39% |
| 34 | LOYA Fernando | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 79% | 31% | |
| 35 | STEPHAN Jens | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 23% |
| 36 | NIXON Mark | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 46% | 11% |
| 37 | LI Yunji (Rain) | 100% | 97% | 79% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 38 | LINGVAY Laurance (Larry) S. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 17% | 2% |
| 39 | WU Johnny y. | 100% | 99% | 87% | 58% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 40 | PIVOVAROV Lucas | 100% | 96% | 75% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 41 | KIM Kevin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 49% | 15% |
| 42 | MAXU Tiger | 100% | 93% | 54% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 43 | JOYCE David | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 20% | 3% |
| 44 | PETERSON Matthew | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
| 45 | LUCERO-OLSON Aydin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 45% | 9% |
| 46 | KURITZ Marc M. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 31% | 7% | - |
| 47 | DENG Destin | 100% | 85% | 34% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 48 | TAYLOR Daryl J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 64% | 20% |
| 49 | SMITH Justin C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 42% | 9% |
| 49 | XU Thomas | 100% | 94% | 59% | 18% | 2% | - | |
| 51 | TSANG Gary | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 45% | |
| 52 | ALLEN David | 100% | 95% | 72% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 53 | FU Nolan | 100% | 74% | 32% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 54 | FU Leon | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 69% | 22% | |
| 55 | KLINKNER Richard | 100% | 88% | 40% | 4% | - | - | |
| 56 | VOO Lucas | 100% | 85% | 46% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 58 | ALI Adam | 100% | 98% | 81% | 36% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 59 | LEE Damien | 100% | 97% | 67% | 15% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | FUNG SHAUN | 100% | 49% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 61 | ELLOWAY William | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 59% | 22% | 3% |
| 62 | PARKE Nathaniel | 100% | 87% | 51% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 63 | LIANG Donny | 100% | 86% | 52% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
| 64 | MCALVANY Dashel | 100% | 82% | 22% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 65 | KIM Remington | 100% | 70% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 66 | SANKEY Levi | 100% | 99% | 86% | 54% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 67 | HEINS Dylan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 42% | 12% | 1% |
| 68 | SOUKUP Branden | 100% | 95% | 73% | 38% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 69 | TANG William | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 30% | 6% | - |
| 70 | BAILEY Creston P. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 73% | 32% | 7% | 1% |
| 71 | SETTE Alessandro | 100% | 84% | 47% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 71 | MCLAREN Mason | 100% | 92% | 64% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 73 | HILLSTROM Nathan | 100% | 99% | 86% | 51% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 74 | YI David | 100% | 70% | 26% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 75 | CHOI JJ | 100% | 82% | 36% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 76 | ZHENG Haoran | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 18% |
| 77 | MARSH Timothy G. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 15% | 2% |
| 78 | GELNAW William (Gypsy) H. | 100% | 99% | 87% | 58% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 79 | KNIGHT Alex | 100% | 85% | 46% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 79 | HORN Evans | 100% | 34% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 81 | WAGHOLIKAR Prathit | 100% | 87% | 33% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 81 | CHEONG Cameron | 100% | 63% | 22% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 83 | XUE Chenming | 100% | 54% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 84 | KOU Mason | 100% | 40% | 5% | - | - | - | |
| 85 | HEWITT Frank F. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 44% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 85 | CHAO Warren | 100% | 90% | 58% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 87 | HEISLER Brendan E. | 100% | 95% | 68% | 27% | 5% | - | - |
| 88 | CREASON Nicholas | 100% | 41% | 6% | - | - | - | - |
| 88 | GAYLORD Ronan | 100% | 37% | 6% | - | - | - | |
| 90 | KENO Daniel | 100% | 33% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
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.