Rocky Point, NY - Rocky Point, NY, 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 | YEN Darren | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 42% | 10% | |
| 2 | BUENAVENTURA Christian | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 58% | 25% | 5% |
| 3 | RIVERA Inigo Franco | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 43% |
| 3 | VARUKATTY-GAFOOR Akhil | 100% | 93% | 64% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 5 | YAO Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 26% |
| 6 | RAMAN Easwer | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 53% | 7% |
| 7 | TRAVAGLIONE Conor D. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 25% | |
| 8 | SEVOSTYANOV Stepan (Seva) | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 43% | 13% | 1% |
| 9 | RAI Avin | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 40% | 9% | |
| 10 | ODIERNO Payton W. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 35% | 6% |
| 11 | CHIEN Phillip L. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 43% | 11% | |
| 12 | TIAN Albert | 100% | 98% | 84% | 48% | 15% | 2% | |
| 13 | GILES Jeremy M. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 41% | 6% | |
| 14 | MORRIS Samuel A. | 100% | 90% | 59% | 23% | 4% | - | |
| 15 | PEDERSEN Leif | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 16% | 2% |
| 16 | SO Hananiah | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 29% | |
| 17 | BARTOLO Domenic V. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 16% |
| 18 | MOSZCZYNSKI Adam | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 59% | 16% | |
| 19 | HARRIS Alex K. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 36% | 9% | 1% |
| 20 | BASALYGA Jeffrey | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 46% |
| 21 | LUKASHENKO Darii | 100% | 100% | 85% | 48% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 22 | YEN Preston | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 54% | 15% | |
| 23 | TAKEMARU Leo | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 66% | 21% | |
| 24 | HUDDY Brandon J. | 100% | 95% | 71% | 30% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 25 | BARNETT Adam | 100% | 91% | 55% | 15% | 1% | - | |
| 26 | TRAVERS Samir T. | 100% | 80% | 29% | 4% | - | - | |
| 27 | FANG David | 100% | 79% | 29% | 4% | - | - | |
| 28 | HENNICKE Michael G. | 100% | 97% | 79% | 43% | 12% | 1% | |
| 29 | NI AMEN Zahir K. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 26% | 4% |
| 30 | LUO ZIRUI | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 31% | 6% |
| 31 | WU Nicholas R. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 43% | 14% | 2% |
| 32 | LINSKY Matthew | 100% | 91% | 60% | 23% | 4% | - | |
| 33 | LASORSA Matthew | 100% | 96% | 77% | 44% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 34 | LOBO-BERG Gabriel (G) K. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 52% | 14% | |
| 35 | MARSDEN Jack C. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 54% | 16% | 2% | |
| 36 | CHO Sungmin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 81% | 28% | |
| 37 | TANG Brendan J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 81% | 35% | 3% | |
| 38 | LAU Jeremy Y. | 100% | 96% | 76% | 41% | 12% | 1% | |
| 39 | LO Joshua H. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 28% | 5% | - |
| 40 | LIU Kelly | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 34% | 6% |
| 41 | WOOD Elden S. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 65% | 23% | 3% | |
| 42 | CHEN Niles Z. | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 23% | 4% | |
| 43 | QUAN Nicholas | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 27% | 6% | - |
| 44 | ANGELILLO Nicholas | 100% | 85% | 49% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 45 | WALKER Robert Connor | 100% | 92% | 59% | 19% | 2% | - | - |
| 46 | GILLIGAN Wolff | 100% | 100% | 94% | 72% | 35% | 8% | |
| 47 | SHERR Cameron E. | 100% | 91% | 54% | 18% | 3% | - | |
| 48 | HAN Daniel Y. | 100% | 46% | 6% | - | - | - | |
| 49 | HO Kaden M. | 100% | 76% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 50 | PATTON Colin T. | 100% | 74% | 30% | 5% | - | - | |
| 51 | EPSTEIN Henry N. | 100% | 88% | 52% | 16% | 2% | - | - |
| 52 | ZHOU Miles | 100% | 34% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 53 | DETO Daniel (Danny) J. | 100% | 99% | 86% | 47% | 12% | 1% | - |
| 54 | DUNN John (Jack) F. | 100% | 87% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 54 | ANGEL Jonathan | 100% | 95% | 71% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 56 | DONNELLY Aidan K. | 100% | 89% | 55% | 19% | 3% | - | |
| 57 | YOU Jaden | 100% | 46% | 8% | - | - | - | |
| 58 | DOUCET Justin P. | 100% | 59% | 14% | 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.