Duke Energy Convention Center - Cincinnati, OH, 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 | HURME Tommi K. | - | 1% | 8% | 37% | 54% | ||
| 2 | HALLMAN Nicholas (Nick) J. | - | - | 4% | 21% | 45% | 30% | |
| 3 | MACZIK Adam W. | - | - | 5% | 23% | 45% | 26% | |
| 3 | LIOU Solomon | 1% | 11% | 34% | 37% | 15% | 2% | |
| 5 | CONKLIN Jim | 1% | 14% | 42% | 36% | 7% | ||
| 6 | SPROWLES Cameron D. | - | - | - | 3% | 23% | 59% | 14% |
| 7 | MANDOKI Sandor I. | - | - | 3% | 18% | 43% | 36% | |
| 8 | MAKMATOV Vadim | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 22% | |
| 9 | TSINIS Alexander E. | - | - | - | - | 1% | 24% | 74% |
| 10 | CHRISTY Peter C. | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | |
| 11 | YAMASAKI Kyle A. | - | - | 4% | 24% | 56% | 15% | |
| 12 | OLIVERIUS Joseph W. | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 44% | 21% | |
| 13 | COX Matthew T. | 2% | 16% | 37% | 32% | 11% | 1% | |
| 14 | DEPAUW Devan | - | 4% | 22% | 41% | 28% | 4% | - |
| 15 | CHU Brandon A. | 4% | 25% | 40% | 25% | 6% | - | |
| 16 | FIEDERLEIN Andrew M. | 10% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 5% | - | |
| 17 | CARTER Austin L. | - | 5% | 24% | 40% | 25% | 5% | |
| 18 | FENOUL Frederic | - | - | - | 2% | 28% | 69% | |
| 19 | SUVOROV Yuly | 1% | 14% | 41% | 37% | 8% | ||
| 20 | LEWIS-RAMIREZ Ben | 7% | 37% | 40% | 14% | 1% | - | |
| 21 | MCGRATH Sean L. | 5% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% | |
| 22 | GOLCU Doruk | 31% | 45% | 20% | 4% | - | - | |
| 23 | STOCK Jordan | 2% | 19% | 43% | 30% | 5% | - | |
| 24 | ELBAG Mark H. | 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 28% | 8% | |
| 25 | POTTER Joshua (Josh) M. | - | 2% | 15% | 37% | 36% | 10% | |
| 26 | MCNALLY Thomas J. | 2% | 18% | 42% | 32% | 6% | - | |
| 27 | LAWLOR Lee | 21% | 43% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 28 | KIM Jeff | 1% | 7% | 29% | 41% | 21% | 2% | - |
| 29 | VALENTINE Shem | 13% | 42% | 33% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 30 | MORET Eric N. | 18% | 48% | 28% | 6% | - | ||
| 31 | KRIEGER Nathanial | 12% | 33% | 34% | 17% | 4% | - | |
| 32 | SUCHOSKI Annika | 56% | 36% | 8% | 1% | - | - | |
| 33 | ISAAC Mena | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 44% | 24% | |
| 34 | EVERT Todd | 1% | 7% | 28% | 41% | 21% | 3% | |
| 35 | PEI Suyang | 29% | 45% | 22% | 4% | - | - | |
| 37 | LOCASALE Nicholas A. | 4% | 23% | 40% | 26% | 6% | 1% | |
| 38 | REED David | 18% | 42% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 39 | FULLER II Thomas | 48% | 41% | 10% | 1% | - | ||
| 40 | TURNER Joshua | 5% | 29% | 40% | 21% | 5% | - | |
| 41 | CHI Kai-Hung | 46% | 41% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 42 | COLE Matthew | 2% | 14% | 37% | 35% | 12% | 1% | - |
| 43 | MIZRAHI Meir | 60% | 34% | 6% | - | - | - | |
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.