Manalapan, NJ - Manalapan, NJ, 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 | WILLIAMS Nolan E. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 56% |
2 | SILBERZWEIG Jordan H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 63% |
3 | CZYZEWSKI Konrad R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 20% | |
3 | MORREALE John | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 73% | 31% | |
5 | GEFELL Andrew P. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 36% |
6 | SAKHAMURI Surya | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 59% |
7 | LO Joshua H. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 22% | |
8 | CHAN Matthew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 32% | |
9 | LASORSA Matthew | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 32% | 7% | |
10 | YEN Preston | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 59% | 18% | |
11 | MAKLIN Edward P. | 100% | 94% | 71% | 35% | 10% | 1% | |
12 | YUAN Kevin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 26% | 3% |
13 | HONG Vincent Q. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 14% | 1% |
14 | YANG Richard | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 28% | 4% |
15 | KOGAN Benjamin | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 30% | 5% | |
16 | PETRAMALE Samuel J. | 100% | 98% | 82% | 47% | 14% | 2% | |
17 | CALKINS William H. | 100% | 99% | 84% | 47% | 14% | 1% | |
18 | TSODIKOV Matthew G. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 75% | 36% | 6% |
19 | LINSKY Matthew | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 21% | |
20 | NOBLE Colin | 100% | 90% | 58% | 22% | 4% | - | |
21 | ZHANG Jeffrey | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 17% | 2% |
22 | LEMPERT Levy A. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 44% | 13% | 1% |
23 | BUCHMANN Finn D. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 40% | 9% |
24 | MAHONEY Colin M. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 43% | 10% | |
25 | DEWEY Charles J. | 100% | 93% | 63% | 24% | 4% | - | |
26 | LUKASHENKO Darii | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 37% | 9% | |
27 | RAUSCHER Ryan | 100% | 99% | 79% | 40% | 11% | 1% | |
28 | HO Kaden M. | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 25% | 5% | - |
29 | WOLFE-MCGUIRE George T. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 35% | 8% | |
30 | ERACHSHAW Cyrus P. | 100% | 98% | 83% | 49% | 15% | 2% | |
30 | LEE Justin | 100% | 98% | 82% | 48% | 15% | 2% | |
32 | LUTHRA Arjun | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 31% | 5% | |
33 | DENG Andrew | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 22% | 4% | - |
34 | HUANG Alexander C. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 32% | 8% | 1% |
35 | CHAN Austin | 100% | 89% | 57% | 22% | 4% | - | - |
36 | GHOSH Tuhin | 100% | 100% | 96% | 75% | 37% | 7% | |
37 | CHENG Kyle | 100% | 94% | 64% | 25% | 5% | - | |
38 | OVERDECK Andrew | 100% | 88% | 51% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
39 | HUANG Ian | 100% | 96% | 76% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - |
40 | LI Junyou | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 39% | 10% | 1% |
41 | CHAN Alexander S. | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 3% | - |
42 | MCCARTHY Gabriel | 100% | 99% | 88% | 56% | 21% | 4% | - |
43 | PANDEY Neil | 100% | 97% | 79% | 45% | 14% | 2% | - |
44 | SHTEIN Yan | 100% | 97% | 77% | 41% | 12% | 2% | - |
45 | SANFILIPPO-SCHERER Alexander G. | 100% | 85% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - | |
46 | MALONE Gregory D. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 46% | 14% | 2% | |
46 | HU Andrew | 100% | 83% | 46% | 15% | 3% | - | |
48 | HUANG Ethan F. | 100% | 96% | 76% | 42% | 13% | 2% | |
49 | CHANG Yufeng | 100% | 58% | 17% | 2% | - | - | |
50 | ZHENG Edward L. | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 18% | 3% | - |
51 | HUANG Tyler T. | 100% | 99% | 85% | 51% | 18% | 3% | - |
52 | GEORGE Daniel | 100% | 70% | 29% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
53 | GRYCIUK Koby | 100% | 60% | 18% | 3% | - | - | - |
54 | SHI Erick | 100% | 43% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
55 | ROSEN Ben | 100% | 75% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - | |
56 | FISK Ethan | 100% | 73% | 30% | 6% | 1% | - | |
57 | CHU Edrick | 100% | 85% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
58 | GAJDA Jesse | 100% | 24% | 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.