Supreme Courts Basketball Academy - LAS VEGAS, NV, 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 | CHOI Chanyoung | - | - | - | - | - | 10% | 89% |
| 2 | KIM Gyumin | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 40% | 52% |
| 3 | CUMMINGS Kai | - | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 45% | 16% |
| 3 | CHEONG Cameron | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 32% | 11% | 1% |
| 5 | LEE Seungwoo | - | - | - | - | 3% | 24% | 73% |
| 6 | XUE Michael | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 8% |
| 7 | BROWN Korbyn | - | 3% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% |
| 8 | KOHLER Florian | 5% | 27% | 39% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 9 | TOYOFUKU Lucas | 5% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 9% | 1% | |
| 10 | SCHWITZER Eliot | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 37% | 16% | 1% |
| 11 | WANG Dylan | 2% | 16% | 35% | 32% | 13% | 2% | |
| 12 | BLAT Robert | - | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 35% | 9% |
| 13 | LEUNG Dylan | - | 3% | 13% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 3% |
| 14 | COHEN Joshua | 1% | 11% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% | |
| 15 | KAZMIEROWSKI Chrissa | - | - | 2% | 14% | 43% | 40% | 1% |
| 16 | KNIGHT Alex | - | 2% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 13% | 1% |
| 17 | KLINKNER Richard | - | 2% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 14% | |
| 18 | KIM Kihong | - | 1% | 6% | 20% | 34% | 30% | 10% |
| 19 | LAURSEN Logan | - | 3% | 17% | 38% | 33% | 7% | |
| 20 | ORELUP Austin | 1% | 6% | 23% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
| 21 | BERTEL Florian | 1% | 8% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 4% | |
| 22 | URCIOLI Phenix | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 38% | 12% | 1% |
| 23 | MANDEL Christian | - | 1% | 10% | 35% | 44% | 10% | |
| 24 | WELLING Cohen | 6% | 27% | 39% | 23% | 6% | - | |
| 25 | CHAO Warren | - | - | 5% | 24% | 45% | 25% | |
| 26 | DELISLE Jonas P. | - | - | - | 5% | 32% | 62% | |
| 27 | OR Anson | 7% | 34% | 41% | 16% | 2% | - | - |
| 28 | NUGENT Curtis | 5% | 23% | 39% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 29 | KIM Evan | 2% | 12% | 33% | 37% | 15% | 2% | |
| 30 | SHIN Yubin | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 43% | 37% |
| 31 | MAGNUSON Thomas | - | 4% | 21% | 38% | 28% | 8% | - |
| 32 | DENG Andes | 18% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 33 | XUE Chenming | - | 5% | 24% | 40% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 34 | TAMAYO-SARVER Daniel | 4% | 29% | 39% | 22% | 6% | 1% | |
| 35 | SZETO Zachary | 15% | 38% | 34% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 36 | BAKKEN Archer | 2% | 12% | 34% | 38% | 13% | 1% | |
| 37 | KOU Mason | 13% | 37% | 35% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 38 | CROY Felix | 10% | 32% | 37% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 39 | DANIELS Jonathan | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 32% | 10% | |
| 40 | WALLIS Wyatt | - | 2% | 12% | 29% | 34% | 18% | 4% |
| 41 | WHITESIDES Scott M. | - | 2% | 10% | 29% | 39% | 20% | |
| 42 | MALLON Jeremy | - | 2% | 12% | 33% | 38% | 15% | |
| 43 | WILLIAMS Timothy | - | - | 4% | 22% | 45% | 28% | |
| 44 | LYMAN Nicolas | 2% | 15% | 37% | 34% | 12% | 1% | |
| 45 | COIMBATORE Dillon | 52% | 38% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 46 | HOWIE Ryan | - | 5% | 23% | 38% | 27% | 7% | |
| 47 | RUDY Jacob | 14% | 39% | 34% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 48 | VALLURI Rohan | 1% | 7% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 6% | |
| 49 | KOUTSOUKOS James | 1% | 8% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 5% | |
| 50 | AYDIN Kaan | 44% | 40% | 14% | 2% | - | - | |
| 51 | LA Charles | 17% | 42% | 30% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 52 | KOU Andrew | 1% | 10% | 30% | 38% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 52 | CHI Kai-Hung | 4% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 54 | HOLSOPPLE Noah | 1% | 7% | 24% | 35% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 55 | SMITH Samuel J. | 5% | 29% | 41% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 56 | FACKRELL Jacen | 27% | 41% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 57 | THOMAS Jr. Robert D. | - | 1% | 7% | 31% | 47% | 13% | 1% |
| 59 | VYAS Arjun | 44% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 60 | FELDMAN Louis | 19% | 47% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 61 | HORN Evans | 17% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 62 | ROGERS John D. | 23% | 40% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 63 | ROLDAN Ethan | 21% | 42% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 64 | CREASON Nicholas | 42% | 41% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 65 | GALLIVAN James | 63% | 31% | 5% | - | - | - | |
| 66 | PEARSON Steven A. | 16% | 40% | 33% | 10% | 1% | - | |
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.