Edison, NJ - Edison, 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 | KARAM Tariq A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 73% |
| 2 | YEN Darren | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 59% |
| 3 | LILOV Neil | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 73% | 30% |
| 3 | LIU kelly | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 46% | 10% | |
| 5 | LINSKY Matthew | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 16% | |
| 6 | WIND Nicky E. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 52% | 14% |
| 7 | LIN John A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 29% |
| 8 | KIM Avery J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 40% | |
| 9 | CZYZEWSKI Konrad R. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 49% | 16% | 2% |
| 10 | SO Hananiah | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 58% | 12% |
| 11 | BASALYGA Jeffrey | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 18% | |
| 12 | SHOMAN Zachary | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 39% | 12% | 2% |
| 13 | CHAN Matthew | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 58% | 19% | 1% |
| 14 | HO Kaden M. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 69% | 32% | 7% | 1% |
| 15 | BARTOLO Domenic V. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 32% | 6% |
| 16 | MOLINA Nicholas (Nico) G. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 46% | 11% |
| 17 | BARNETT Adam | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 30% |
| 18 | ERACHSHAW Taras P. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 71% | 28% |
| 19 | MORRILL William | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 80% | 34% | 4% |
| 20 | MORREALE John | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 26% | 4% |
| 21 | SAVOY Luca | 100% | 81% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 22 | SANFILIPPO-SCHERER Alexander G. | 100% | 94% | 62% | 25% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 23 | EPSTEIN Henry N. | 100% | 98% | 82% | 48% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 24 | YAO Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 35% | 4% |
| 25 | WANG Robert | 100% | 96% | 69% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 26 | ERACHSHAW Cyrus P. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
| 27 | WILSON Jude | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 48% | 12% |
| 28 | ZHENG Edward L. | 100% | 98% | 84% | 49% | 16% | 2% | - |
| 29 | DENG Andrew | 100% | 82% | 43% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 30 | ALTIRS Alexander | 100% | 99% | 86% | 53% | 19% | 3% | - |
| 31 | CHEN Evan P. | 100% | 68% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 32 | MORRILL Justin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 25% | 4% |
| 33 | YEN Preston | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 28% | 4% | |
| 34 | HAN Daniel Y. | 100% | 76% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 35 | HUANG Tyler T. | 100% | 93% | 64% | 27% | 6% | - | - |
| 36 | LIU Mingyang Ryan | 100% | 89% | 50% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 37 | SHOMAN Noah | 100% | 91% | 61% | 25% | 5% | - | |
| 38 | HONG Vincent Q. | 100% | 98% | 86% | 56% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 39 | BERMAN Luca | 100% | 99% | 87% | 54% | 19% | 3% | - |
| 40 | NG Jeremiah | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 26% | 6% | 1% |
| 41 | WONG Ryan | 100% | 99% | 90% | 55% | 14% | 1% | - |
| 42 | ZENG Noah | 100% | 96% | 77% | 41% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 43 | OVERDECK Andrew | 100% | 98% | 78% | 35% | 6% | - | - |
| 44 | BUCCINO George | 100% | 79% | 32% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 45 | LEVIN Mark A. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 25% | 4% | |
| 46 | COLE Alexander | 100% | 92% | 62% | 26% | 5% | - | |
| 47 | JUN Ryan | 100% | 95% | 70% | 30% | 6% | - | |
| 48 | FIELDS Matthew S. | 100% | 93% | 67% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 49 | MOULTON Ian | 100% | 44% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 50 | EDELMAN Seth A. | 100% | 77% | 34% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 51 | MCCARTHY Gabriel | 100% | 96% | 75% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 52 | ALTIRS Giorgio | 100% | 56% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 53 | FLITSANOV Macabee | 100% | 59% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 54 | CHARLES samuel | 100% | 74% | 31% | 7% | 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.