Torrance, CA - Torrance, CA, 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 | MOOSEKIAN Stafford | - | - | 2% | 10% | 29% | 39% | 20% |
| 2 | NORBUTAS Jackson S. | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 44% | 35% |
| 3 | DAO Matthew M. | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 47% | 35% |
| 3 | JEON Alexander E. | - | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 41% | 16% |
| 5 | JEONG Connor | - | - | 1% | 12% | 34% | 38% | 14% |
| 6 | WEI Zikun | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 42% | 40% |
| 7 | MATTIS George | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 39% | 18% | 3% |
| 8 | CHU Anthony | - | 2% | 12% | 39% | 36% | 11% | 1% |
| 9 | MILAM Hugh | - | - | - | - | 4% | 28% | 67% |
| 10 | MEINHOLD Li | - | 1% | 6% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 8% |
| 11 | WILKENS Zach Q. | - | 5% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
| 12 | LEE Matthew C. | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 37% | 19% | 2% |
| 13 | SHAMIS Mark | - | - | - | 4% | 21% | 44% | 30% |
| 14 | MENDOZA Zachari | 2% | 14% | 31% | 32% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 15 | AHN Gus | 5% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 16 | SOOHOO Jackson F. | 1% | 11% | 29% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 1% |
| 17 | PAEK Alex J. | - | - | - | 5% | 27% | 49% | 18% |
| 18 | SIVAGAR Leo | - | 3% | 18% | 38% | 32% | 9% | 1% |
| 19 | YUMIACO Nolan C. | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
| 20 | THOMPSON Chester | - | 4% | 19% | 39% | 30% | 9% | 1% |
| 21 | LIANG Aaron | - | 1% | 8% | 33% | 38% | 17% | 3% |
| 22 | MOHEBI Saam | 1% | 5% | 18% | 31% | 29% | 14% | 3% |
| 23 | DE JONG Thijmen J. | - | - | 3% | 17% | 38% | 32% | 9% |
| 24 | LEE Alexander G. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 26% | 45% | 22% |
| 25 | LEVY Zachari I. | - | - | 3% | 14% | 33% | 36% | 14% |
| 26 | SCHENCK Theo | 2% | 16% | 34% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 27 | SMITH Zane A. | 2% | 14% | 32% | 32% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 28 | ZHU Max | 1% | 7% | 20% | 31% | 27% | 12% | 2% |
| 29 | DEKERMANJI Christopher | - | - | 4% | 16% | 33% | 33% | 13% |
| 30 | ROBINSON Riley | - | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 44% | 24% |
| 31 | WONG Daniel | 1% | 9% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 7% | 1% |
| 32 | KIM Sterling S. | 22% | 45% | 28% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 33 | WELLS Tommy R. | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 11% |
| 34 | ALVAREZ Ian T. | 3% | 14% | 29% | 31% | 17% | 5% | 1% |
| 35 | JUNG Alexander | - | 6% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 9% | 1% |
| 36 | FOREMAN Alexander E. | 18% | 36% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - | - |
| 37 | LOGUE Ethan D. | - | 1% | 7% | 31% | 42% | 17% | 2% |
| 38 | FEES HOLDEN | 1% | 11% | 34% | 36% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 39 | WANG Nathan | - | 2% | 8% | 22% | 33% | 26% | 8% |
| 40 | MAENG Jake W. | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 36% | 14% | 2% |
| 41 | MUIR Douglas K. | 12% | 38% | 37% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 42 | KIM Darius H. | 11% | 34% | 35% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 43 | EMARA Omar | 7% | 36% | 40% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 44 | KIM Benjamin I. | - | 5% | 22% | 39% | 27% | 7% | 1% |
| 45 | PARK Elliot | 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
| 46 | KOSLU Aidan D. | 9% | 33% | 37% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 47 | SINGHA Orion | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 5% |
| 48 | KOPPE Alexander | 11% | 31% | 34% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 48 | WITT Zachary | 51% | 37% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 50 | KOPPE Benjamin | 24% | 45% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 51 | WOO Jonathan | 10% | 44% | 34% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 52 | USHER Alexander | 1% | 8% | 22% | 32% | 26% | 11% | 2% |
| 53 | JIN daniel | 1% | 6% | 20% | 32% | 27% | 12% | 2% |
| 54 | PIROTTO Nicholas | 8% | 47% | 34% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | BRUSKOTTER Reiland | 10% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 55 | BERSHIN Izzy | 3% | 20% | 45% | 26% | 5% | - | - |
| 57 | CRONIN Alexander | 53% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 58 | CROSSMAN Brandon | 38% | 49% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 59 | PHUKAN Rohin | 40% | 41% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 60 | COMER Alexander J. | 4% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 61 | BISEN Aryaman | 50% | 37% | 11% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 62 | WOODMANSEE Nathan | 20% | 47% | 28% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 63 | MCGINLEY Walker | 13% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 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.