The Fencing Center - San Jose, CA, 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 | SADOVSKY Leor B. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 38% |
2 | KRYLTSOV Michael | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 79% | 32% |
3 | SHEN Owen | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 50% | 11% |
3 | SISINNI Riccardo | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 52% | 13% |
5 | MARTIN IV Elmer D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 28% |
6 | KANG Anthony | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 90% | 47% | |
7 | KIM Aiden | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 41% | 9% |
8 | KIM Andrew J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% |
9 | CO Dylan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 57% | 15% |
10 | NAYGAS LAWRENCE I. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 60% |
11 | MA Andrew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 37% |
12 | XU Jia Bao (Bowen) | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 48% |
13 | FUKUDA Diego | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 26% | 5% |
14 | RASMUSSEN Sage | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 19% | 3% | |
15 | LEE Dylan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 41% | 11% | 1% |
16 | SHAGIDANYAN German | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 70% | 24% | 3% |
17 | SOTO-ULEV Aden A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 63% | 21% | |
18 | ZHANG Jiening G. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 30% |
19 | LING Eddie | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 33% | 6% |
20 | COELHO Cristiano P. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 56% |
21 | LIPPMAN Sam | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 65% | 30% | 6% |
22 | NGUYEN martin | 100% | 99% | 89% | 63% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
23 | WU Alber Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 16% |
24 | LI Matthew | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 23% | 2% |
25 | LLIDO Soren | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 37% | 9% | |
26 | HOSKERI Anik S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 15% |
27 | KIM Ryan Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 68% | 20% |
28 | LI Samuel | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 23% | 5% | - |
29 | KIAYIAS Aris | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 56% | 22% | 3% |
30 | LO Preston | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 16% | 2% | |
31 | MAO Lucas | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 25% | 3% |
32 | PARK Rion | 100% | 96% | 75% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - |
33 | PARK Sky | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 25% | 6% | 1% |
34 | CHOI Ethan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 35% |
35 | ZHANG Aaron | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 72% | 21% | |
36 | WONG Evan | 100% | 96% | 74% | 32% | 7% | 1% | |
37 | MA Bryant | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 24% | 3% |
38 | RUBIN Max | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 22% | 3% |
39 | LI Richard | 100% | 100% | 92% | 64% | 24% | 4% | - |
40 | LYNCH Owen C. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 23% | 3% |
41 | AGRAWAL Niki | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 18% | 3% | - |
42 | WU Lucas | 100% | 100% | 100% | 92% | 46% | 8% | |
43 | MORROW Brenden | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 54% | 15% | |
44 | GRIFFITH MCALLISTER Thomas | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 43% | 9% | - |
45 | TSAY Jordan R. | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 18% | 2% | - |
46 | LEE Christopher T. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 46% | 12% |
47 | DERRICK Blake | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 40% | 12% | 1% |
48 | FANG Jaden | 100% | 99% | 87% | 55% | 21% | 4% | - |
49 | KIM Daniel Y. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 26% | 4% | - |
50 | WU Alistair | 100% | 94% | 68% | 29% | 6% | - | - |
51 | TONKOVICH Ryan | 100% | 97% | 81% | 48% | 17% | 3% | - |
52 | CHAN Connor | 100% | 76% | 31% | 6% | - | - | - |
53 | YI William | 100% | 85% | 50% | 18% | 4% | - | |
54 | SENIC Lucas | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 56% | 15% | |
55 | RANJITH Yash M. | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 17% | 3% | |
56 | CHUN Dashel | 100% | 93% | 55% | 8% | - | - | |
57 | PALMA Nathan Anthony | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 50% | 18% | 3% |
58 | UHLIG Cole | 100% | 99% | 89% | 60% | 22% | 2% | - |
59 | YUE Jackson | 100% | 96% | 59% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
60 | CORTRIGHT Skipper | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 39% | 7% |
61 | LIU William | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 22% | 5% | - |
62 | NICOLETTI Luca | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 32% | 7% | |
63 | ZHOU Ryan | 100% | 84% | 43% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
64 | WONG Jacob W. | 100% | 88% | 54% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
65 | BORG Matthew | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 46% | 13% | 1% |
66 | PONS Diego | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 16% | 3% | - |
67 | HIRAMOTO Satoshi | 100% | 99% | 86% | 51% | 16% | 2% | - |
68 | PARK Ryan | 100% | 87% | 47% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
69 | LAM Nicolas | 100% | 99% | 88% | 56% | 19% | 3% | - |
70 | NGAI Julian | 100% | 99% | 92% | 69% | 35% | 10% | 1% |
71 | KAREHT Kai | 100% | 66% | 23% | 4% | - | - | - |
72 | SCHIENEMAN Valentine | 100% | 92% | 63% | 26% | 5% | - | - |
73 | CHOI Ethan | 100% | 92% | 64% | 29% | 7% | 1% | - |
74 | LUI Jake | 100% | 87% | 54% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
75 | LU Kevin | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 15% | 2% | - |
76 | SONG Matthew | 100% | 97% | 68% | 27% | 5% | - | - |
77 | LE Jacob | 100% | 70% | 24% | 3% | - | - | |
78 | ONG William | 100% | 79% | 29% | 2% | - | - | |
79 | MANIKTALA Suvir | 100% | 82% | 44% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
80 | GORDON William L. | 100% | 84% | 48% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
81 | PERKINS Jaray | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
82 | UPENDER West | 100% | 78% | 33% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
83 | SAH Steven | 100% | 89% | 57% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - |
84 | JIANG Yehong | 100% | 79% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
85 | ZHANG Graham | 100% | 94% | 67% | 27% | 5% | - | - |
86 | BHOBE Arjun | 100% | 76% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
87 | DULAI Angad | 100% | 100% | 90% | 56% | 20% | 3% | - |
88 | FLIGOR William | 100% | 72% | 26% | 4% | - | - | |
89 | TULYAG Azim | 100% | 94% | 68% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - |
89 | CHAN Joseph | 100% | 79% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
91 | BANUELOS Dario | 100% | 52% | 9% | - | - | - | |
92 | HOM Logan | 100% | 52% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
93 | LIANG Ethan | 100% | 20% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
93 | JEONG Taewoo | 100% | 69% | 23% | 3% | - | - | - |
95 | FOY Grant | 100% | 39% | 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.