Salle Auriol Seattle - Seattle, WA, 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 | ||
| 1 | MORENO BRIONES Patricio A. | - | - | - | - | 10% | 90% |
| 3 | ANDERSON Nathan T. | - | - | - | 3% | 26% | 71% |
| 3 | FLANAGAN James | - | 6% | 30% | 45% | 19% | |
| 5 | TANG Julian | - | 1% | 12% | 38% | 38% | 11% |
| 6 | KISSINGFORD John F. | - | 3% | 20% | 46% | 31% | |
| 7 | WINSLOW Chris D. | 57% | 35% | 8% | 1% | < 1% | - |
| 8 | FRENZINGER Douglas | - | 3% | 20% | 44% | 33% | - |
| 9 | POWERS Douglas A. | - | 2% | 13% | 38% | 41% | 7% |
| 10 | VALENTINE Iain | - | 4% | 28% | 48% | 20% | - |
| 11 | DARRICAU OLY Henri J. | - | - | 1% | 12% | 88% | |
| 12 | BEASLEY Julien | 2% | 15% | 37% | 34% | 11% | 1% |
| 13 | HEINRICH Kevin B. | 2% | 15% | 40% | 34% | 9% | |
| 14 | PUSHKIN Yoni | - | 3% | 18% | 36% | 32% | 10% |
| 15 | GARDNER William | 1% | 14% | 44% | 38% | 2% | |
| 16 | LIU David | - | 4% | 18% | 35% | 32% | 11% |
| 17 | WILCOX Stephen | 6% | 38% | 43% | 13% | - | |
| 18 | BHATT Jay | 18% | 48% | 28% | 6% | - | |
| 19 | CLAYTON Byron | 7% | 33% | 39% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 20 | STERLING William D. | 6% | 35% | 40% | 17% | 2% | - |
| 21 | JONES Bryan T. | 4% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
| 22 | GELLER Alan S. | 47% | 42% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 23 | PHILLIPS Daniel | 4% | 29% | 46% | 20% | 1% | |
| 24 | ZEISS Gary M. | 4% | 23% | 41% | 27% | 6% | - |
| 25 | WALTERS John | 67% | 29% | 4% | - | - | |
| 26 | RODRIGUEZ VINCENT | 47% | 41% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 27 | LUTTON Thomas (Tom) W. | 2% | 17% | 37% | 32% | 11% | 1% |
| 29 | YIM Michael | 45% | 41% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 29 | PETERSON Ryan | 6% | 31% | 44% | 17% | 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.